Patent Grant
11377704
Any and all applications for which a foreign or domestic priority claim is identified in the Application Data Sheet as filed with the present application are hereby incorporated by reference under 37 CFR 1.57.
In recent years the use or coiled tubing has been expanded to applications that require high pressure and extended reach operations. As a consequence, there is a need to produce coiled tubing with elevated tensile properties in order to withstand: i) axial loads on hanging or pooling long strings, and ii) elevated pressures applied during operation.
The standard production of coiled tubing uses as raw material, hot rolled strips with mechanical properties achieved through microstructural refinement during rolling. This refinement is obtained with the use of different microalloying additions (Ti, N, V) as well as appropriate selection of hot rolling processing conditions. The objective is to control material recrystalization and grain growth in order to achieve an ultra-fine microstructure. The material is limited in the use of solid solution alloying elements and precipitation hardening, since refinement is the only mechanism that allows for high strength and toughness, simultaneously.
This raw material is specified to each supplier, and may require varying mechanical properties in the hot roiled steel in order to produce coiled tubes with varying mechanical properties as well. As the properties increase, the cost of production and hence the raw material cost also increases. It is known that the strip-to-strip welding process used during the assembly of the “long strip” that will be ERW formed/welded into the coiled tubing, deteriorates the joining area. Thereafter, the coiled tubing with increasing properties, tend to have a relatively lower performance on the area of the strip welds. This deterioration is caused by the fact that the welding processes destroys the refinement introduced during hot rolling, and there is no simple post weld heat treatment capable of regenerating both tensile and toughness properties. In general tensile is restored but toughness and its associated fatigue life are deteriorated in this zone. Current industrial route can produce high strength coiled tubing, only at elevated cost and with poor relative performance of strip welds joins with respect to pipe body.
One alternative for producing a coiled tubing is through a full body heat treatment. This treatment is applied to a material that has been formed into a pipe in the so called “green” state, because its properties are yet to be defined by the heat treatment conditions. In this case the main variables affecting the final product properties are the steel chemistry and the heat treatments conditions. Thereafter, by appropriately combining steel composition with welding material and heat treatment, the coiled tubing could be produced with uniform properties across the length eliminating the weak link of the strip-to-strip join that is critical on high strength conventional coiled tubing. This general concept has been described before but never applied successfully to the production of high strength coiled tubing (yield strength in the range from 80 to 140 ksi). The reason being, that the heat treatment at elevated line speed (needed to achieve high productivity) will generally result in the need for complicated and extended facilities. This process could be simplified if the appropriated chemistry and heat treatment conditions are selected.
The selection of the chemistry that is compatible with an industrial heat treatment facility of reasonable dimensions requires of an understanding of the many variables that affect coiled tubing performance measured as: a) Axial Mechanical Properties, b) Uniformity of Microstructure and Properties, c) Toughness, d) Fatigue Resistance, e) Sour Resistance, among others.
Below is described chemistry designed to produce a heat treated coiled tubing which is mostly outside current limits for coiled tubing as set by API 5ST standard. (Max.C0.16%, Max.Mn:1.2% (CT70-90) Max.Mn:1.65 (CT100-110), Max.P:0.02%, (CT70-90) Max.P:0.025 (CT100-CT110). Max.S:0.005, Si.Max:0.5).
Embodiments of this disclosure are for a coiled steel tube and methods of producing the same. The tube in some embodiments can comprise a yield strength higher than about 80 Ksi. The composition of the tube can comprise 0.16-0.35 wt. % carbon. 0.30-2.00 wt. % manganese, 0.10-0.35 wt. % silicon, up to 0.005 wt. % sulfur, up to 0.018 wt. % phosphorus. the remainder being iron and inevitable impurities. The tube can also comprise a final microstructure: comprising a mixture of tempered martensite and bainite, wherein the final microstructure of the coiled tube comprises more than 90 volume % tempered martensite, wherein the microstructure is homogenous in pipe body, ERW line and strip end-to-end joints.
Disclosed herein is a coiled steel tube formed from a plurality of welded strips, wherein the tube can include base metal regions, weld joints, and their heat affected zones, and can comprise a yield strength greater than about 80 ksi, a composition comprising iron and, 0.17-0.35 wt. % carbon, 0.30-2.00 wt. % manganese, 0.10-0.30 wt. % silicon, 0.010-0.040 wt. % aluminum, up to 0.010 wt. % sulfur, and up to 0.015 wt. % phosphorus, and a final microstructure comprising a mixture of tempered martensite and bainite, wherein the final microstructure of the coiled tube comprises more than 90 volume % tempered martensite in the base metal regions, the weld joints, and the heat affected zones, wherein the final microstructure across all base metal regions, weld joints, and heat affected zones is homogeneous, and wherein the final microstructure comprises a uniform distribution of fine carbides across the base metal regions, the weld joints, and the heat affected zones.
In some embodiments, the composition further comprises, up to 1.0 wt. % chromium, up to 0.5 wt. % molybdenum, up to 0.0030 wt. % boron, up to 0.030 wt. % titanium, up to 0.50 wt. % copper, up to 0.50 wt. % nickel, up to 0.1 wt. % niobium, up to 0.15% vanadium, up to 0.0050 wt. % oxygen, and up to 0.05 wt. % calcium.
In some embodiments, the composition can comprise 0.17 to 0.30 wt. % carbon, 0.30 to 1.60 wt. % manganese, 0.10 to 0.20 wt. % silicon, up to 0.7 wt. % chromium, up to 0.5 wt. % molybdenum, 0.0005 to 0.0025 wt. % boron, 0.010 to 0025 wt. titanium, 0.25 to 0.35 wt. % copper, 0.20 to 0.35 wt. % nickel, up to 0.04 wt. % niobium, up to 0.10 wt. % vanadium, up to 0.0015 wt. % oxygen, up to 0.03 wt. % calcium, up to 0.003 wt. % sulfur; and up to 0.010 wt. % phosphorus.
In some embodiments, the tube can have a minimum yield strength of 125 ksi. In some embodiments, the tube can have a minimum yield strength of 140 ksi. In some embodiments, the tube can have a minimum yield strength of between 125 ksi and 140 ksi.
In some embodiments, the final microstructure can comprise at least 95 volume % tempered martensite in the base metal regions, the weld joints, and the heat affected zones. In some embodiments. the tube can have a final grain size of below 20 μm in the base metal regions, the weld joints, and the heat affected zones. In some embodiments. the tube can have a final grain size of below 15 in the base metal regions, the weld joints, and the heat affected zones.
In some embodiments, the weld joints can comprise bias welds. In some embodiments, the fatigue life at the bias welds can be at least about 80% of the base metal regions. In some embodiments, the a percent hardness of a weld joint, including its heat affected zone, can be 110% or less than a hardness of the base metal.
Also disclosed herein is a method of forming a coiled steel tube which can comprise providing strips having a composition comprising iron and 0.17-0.35 wt. % carbon, 0.30-2.00 wt. % manganese, 0.10-0.30 wt. % silicon, 0.010-0.040 wt. % aluminum, up to 0.010 wt. % sulfur, up to 0.015 wt. % phosphorus, and welding the strips together, forming a tube from the welded strips, wherein the tube comprises base metal regions, joint welds, and their heat affected zones, austenitizing the tube between 900-1000° C., quenching the tube to form a final as quenched microstructure of martensite and bainite, wherein the as quenched microstructure comprises at least 90% martensite in the base metal regions, the weld joints, and the heat affected zones, and tempering the quenched tube between 550-720° C., wherein tempering of the quenched tube results in a yield strength greater than about 80 ksi, wherein the microstructure across all base metal regions, weld joints, and the heat affected zones is homogeneous, and wherein the microstructure comprises a uniform distribution of fine carbides across the base metal regions, the weld joints, and the heat affected zones.
In some embodiments, the welding the strips can comprise bias welding. In some embodiments, the forming the tube can comprise forming a line joint. In some embodiments, the method can further comprise coiling the tempered lube on a spool. In some embodiments, the austenitizing can form a grain size below 20 μm in the base metal regions, the weld joints, and the heat affected zones.
In some embodiments, the composition can further comprise tip to 1.0 wt. % chromium up to 0.5 wt. % molybdenum up to 0.0030 wt. % boron, up to 0.030 wt. % titanium, up to 0.50 wt. % copper, up to 0.50 wt. % nickel, up to 0.1 wt. % niobium, up to 0.15 wt. % vanadium, up to 0.0050 wt. % oxygen, and up to 0.05 wt. % calcium.
In some embodiments, the composition can comprise 0.17 to 0.30 wt. % carbon, 0.30 to 1.60 wt. % manganese, 0.10 to 0.20 wt. % silicon, up to 0.7 wt. % chromium, up to 0.5 wt. % molybdenum, 0.0005 to 0.0025 wt. % boron, 0.010 to 0.025 wt. % titanium, 0.25 to 0.35 wt. % copper, 0.20 to 0.35 wt. % nickel, up to 0.04 wt. % niobium, up to 0.10 wt. % vanadium, up to 0.00015 wt. % oxygen, up to 0.03 wt. % calcium, up to 0.003 wt. % sulfur, and up to 0.010 wt. % phosphorus.
In some embodiments, the tempered tube can have a yield strength greater than or equal to 125 ksi. In some embodiments, the tempered tube can have a minimum yield strength of 140 ksi. In some embodiments, the tempered tube can have a minimum yield strength between 125 and 140 ksi.
Coiled Tubing raw material is produced in a steel shop as hot rolled strips. Controlled rolling is used to guarantee high strength and good toughness through microstructural refinement. The strips are longitudinally cut to the width for pipe production, and then spliced end to end through a joining process (e.g. Plasma Arc Welding or Friction Stir Welding) to form a longer strip. Afterwards, the tube is formed using the ERW process. The final product performance is measured in terms of: a) axial mechanical properties, b) uniformity of microstructure and properties, c) toughness, d) fatigue resistance, e) sour resistance, among others. Using the traditional processing route, the coiled tubing mechanical properties result from the combination of the hot-rolled strip properties and the modifications introduced during welding operations and tube forming. The properties thus obtained are limited when coiled tube performance is measured as listed above. The reason being is that the welding process used to join the strips modifies the refined as-rolled microstructure in a way that, even if a post weld heat treatments is applied, final properties are still impaired. Reduced fatigue life and poor sour performance is associated to heterogeneities in microstructure and presence of brittle constituents across the welds. It has been proposed that a new route should at least comprise a full body heat treatment. This route has been described in general terms but never specified. The disclosure describes the chemistries and raw material characteristics, that combined with appropriated welding processes, and heat treatment conditions, will yield a quenched and tempered product with high performance in both pipe body and strip joining welds. This material is designed for coiled tubing since it is selected not only in terms of relative cost, but preferably in order to maximize fatigue life under the particular conditions that apply to the operation of coiled tubing (low cycle fatigue under bending with simultaneous axial load and internal pressures).
This disclosure is related to a high strength coiled tubing (minimum yield strength ranging from 80 ksi to 140 ksi) having increased low-cycle fatigue life in comparison with standard products, as defined by API 5ST. Additionally, Sulfide Stress Cracking (SSC) resistance is also improved in this disclosure. This outstanding combination of properties is obtained through an appropriate selection of steel chemistry and processing conditions. Industrial processing differs from the standard route in the application of a Full Body Heat Treatment (FBHT), as was disclosed in U.S. App. No. US201210186686 A1. This FBHT is performed after the coiled tubed is formed by ERW (Electrical Resistance Welding) and is composed of at least one cycle of austenitization, quenching and tempering. The above mentioned disclosure is more specifically related to the steel chemistries and processing parameters to produce a quenched and tempered coiled tubing with the above mentioned properties. Although the generation of certain mechanical properties through a heat treatment on a base material with a given composition are part of the general knowledge, the particular application for coiled tubing uses raw material with specific chemistry in order to minimize the detrimental effect of particular variables, such us segregation patterns, on the specific properties of this application.
One of the most important properties to the coiled tube is an increased resistance to low cycle fatigue. This is because during standard field operation coiled tubes are spooled and unspooled frequently, introducing cyclic plastic deformations that may eventually produce failures. During low cycle fatigue, deformation is preferentially localized at the microscopical scale in softer material regions. When brittle constituents are present at or close to these strain concentration regions, cracks can easily nucleate and propagate. Therefore, a reduction in fatigue life is associated with heterogeneous microstructures (having softer regions that localize deformation) in combination with brittle constituents (that nucleate and/or propagate cracks). All these micro-structural features appear in the Heat Affected Zone of the welds (HAZ). There are some types of pipe body microstructures that also present the above mentioned characteristics. This is because they are composed of a mixture of hard and soft constituents, for example ferrite, pearlite and bainite. In this case strain is localized in the softer ferrite, close to the boundary with bainite, in which cracks are nucleated and propagated. High strength coiled tubes have currently this type of microstructure.
In order to avoid strain localization during low cycle fatigue the microstructure has to be not only homogeneous throughout the pipe body and joints, but also in the microscopic scale. For low carbon steels a microstructure composed of tempered martensite, which is basically a ferrite matrix with a homogeneous and fine distribution of carbides, is ideal. Thereafter, the objective of the chemistry selection and processing conditions described in this disclosure is to achieve with the FBHT a homogeneous microstructure (in tube body, bias weld and ERW line) composed of at least 90% tempered martensite, preferably more than 95% tempered martensite.
Additionally, tempered martensite is more suitable to produce ultra-high strength grades than standard coiled tube microstructures (composed of ferrite, pearlite and bainite), for which extremely costly alloying additions are needed to reach yield strengths higher than about 125 Ksi.
When compared with structures containing bainite, other important benefits of tempered martensite is its improved SSC resistance.
Steel chemistry has been defined as the most suitable for production of heat treated coiled tubing using a FBHT, and can be described in terms of concentration of Carbon (wt % C), Manganese (w % Mn), Silicon (w % Si), Chromium (wt % Cr), Molybdenum (w % Mo), as well as micro-alloying elements as Boron (w % B), Titanium (w % Ti), Aluminum (w % Al), Niobium (w % Nb) and Vanadium (w % V). Also, upper limits can be on unavoidable impurities as Sulfur (w % S), Phosphorus (w % P) and Oxygen (w % O).
In order to produce a final structure composed of tempered martensite, the steel chemistry of this disclosure differs mainly from previous coiled tube art because of the higher Carbon content (see for example API 5ST in which maximum Carbon allowed for Coiled tubing is 0.16%), which allows for obtaining the desired microstructure through a FBHT composed of at least one cycle of austenitization, quenching and tempering.
The terms “approximately”, “about”, and “substantially” as used herein represent an amount close to the stated amount that still performs a desired function or achieves a desired result. For example, the terms “approximately”, “about”, and “substantially” may refer to an amount that is within less than 10% of, within less than 5% of, within less than 1% of, within less than 0.1% of, and within less than 0.01% of the stated amount.
Carbon is an element whose addition inexpensively raises the strength of the steel through an improvement in hardenability and the promotion of carbide precipitation during heat treatments. If carbon is reduced below 0.17% hardenability could not be guaranteed, and large fractions of bainite may be formed during heat treatments. The appearance of bainite makes it difficult to reach a yield strength above 80 ksi with the desired fatigue life and SSC resistance. Current coiled tubing route is not suitable for heat treatment since the maximum Carbon allowed by API5ST is 0.16%. Conventional coiled tubing microstructures present large fractions of bainite that impair toughness, fatigue life and SSC resistance in the higher strength grades, i.e. coiled tubings with minimum yield strength above 110 Ksi.
On the other hand, steels with more than 0.35% carbon will have poor weldability, being susceptible to present brittle constituents and cracks during welding and post-weld heat treatment operations. Additionally, higher carbon contents may result in significant amounts of retained austenite after quenching that transform into brittle constituents upon tempering. These brittle constituents impair fatigue life and SSC resistance. Therefore, the C content of the steel composition varies within the range from about 0.17% to about 0.35%, preferably from about 0.17% to about 0.30%.
Manganese addition improves hardenability and strength. Mn also contributes to deoxidation and sulfur control during the steelmaking process. If Mn content is less than about 0.30%, it may be difficult to obtain the desired strength level. However, as Mn content increases, large segregation patterns may be formed. Mn segregated areas will tend to form brittle constituents during heat treatment that impair toughness and reduce fatigue. Additionally, these segregated areas increase the material susceptibility to sulfide stress cracking (SSC). Accordingly, the Mn content of the steel composition vanes within the range from 0.30% to 2.0%, preferably from 0.30% to 1.60%, and more preferably from 0.30% to 0.80% in application for which an improved SSC resistance is used.
Silicon is an element whose addition has a deoxidizing effect during the steel making process and also raises the strength of the steel. In some embodiments, if Si exceeds about 0.30%, the toughness may decrease. Additionally, large segregation patterns may be formed. Therefore, the Si content of the steel composition varies within the range between about 0.10% to 0.30%, preferably about 0.10% to about 0.20%.
Chromium addition increases hardenability and tempering resistance of the steel. Cr can be used to partially replace Mn in the steel composition in order to achieve high strength without producing large segregation patterns that impair fatigue life and SSC resistance. However, Cr is a costly addition that makes the coiled tubing more difficult to produce because of its effects on hot forming loads. Therefore, in some embodiments Cr is limited to about 1.0%, preferably to about 0.7%.
Molybdenum is an element whose addition is effective in increasing the strength of the steel and further assists in retarding softening during tempering. The resistance to tempering allows the production of high strength steels with reduced Mn content increasing fatigue life and SSC resistance. Mo additions may also reduce the segregation of phosphorous to grain boundaries, improving resistance to inter-granular fracture. However, this ferroalloy is expensive, making it desirable to reduce the maximum Mo content within the steel composition. Therefore, in certain embodiments, maximum Mo is about 0.5%.
Boron is an element whose addition is strongly effective in increasing the hardenability of the steel. For example, B may improve hardenability by inhibiting the formation of ferrite during quenching. In some embodiments, B is used to achieve good hardenability (i.e. as quenched structure composed of at least 90% martensite) in steels with Mn content reduced to improve fatigue life and SSC resistance. If the B content is less than about 0.0005 wt. % it may be difficult in these embodiments to obtain the desired hardenability of the steel. However, if the B content too high, coarse boron carbides may be formed at grain boundaries adversely affecting toughness. Accordingly, in an embodiment, the concentration of B in the composition lower than about 0.0030%. in another embodiment B content is from about 0.0005% to 0.0025%.
Titanium is an element whose addition is effective in increasing the effectiveness of B in the steel, by fixing nitrogen impurities as Titanium Nitrides (TiN) and inhibiting the formation of Boron nitrides. If the Ti content is too low it may be difficult in some embodiments to obtain the desired effect of boron on hardenability of the steel. On the other hand, if the Ti content is higher than 0.03 wt % coarse Titanium nitrides and carbides (TiN and TiC) may be formed, adversely affecting ductility and toughness. Accordingly, in certain embodiments, the concentration of Ti may be limited to about 0.030%. In other embodiments, the concentration of Ti may range from about 0.010% to about 0.025%.
Considering that the production of coiled tubing of low mechanical properties benefits from low tempering resistance. B and Ti additions improve hardenability without increasing tempering resistance. Thereafter it allows for the production of 80 ksi grade without significant large soaking times during tempering, with the subsequent improvement in productivity. Since one of the limitations for the production of a coiled tubing in a heat treatment line is the length of the line to adequately soak the material during tempering, the use of B and Ti is particularly relevant to the production of low yield strength coiled tubing.
Copper is an element that is not required in certain embodiments of the steel composition. However, in some coiled tubing applications Cu may be needed to improve atmospheric corrosion resistance. Thus, in certain embodiments, the Cu content of the steel composition may be limited to less than about 0.50%. In other embodiments, the concentration of Cu may range from about 0.25% to about 0.35%.
Nickel is an element whose addition increases the strength and toughness of the steel. If Cu is added to the steel composition. Ni can be used to avoid hot rolling defects known as hot shortness. However, Ni is very costly and, in certain embodiments, the Ni content of the steel composition is limited to less than or equal to about 0.50%. In other embodiments, the concentration of Ni may range from about 0.20% to about 0.35%.
Niobium is an element whose addition to the steel composition may refine the austenitic grain size of the steel during reheating into the austenitic region, with the subsequent increase in both strength and toughness. Nb may also precipitate during tempering, increasing the steel strength by particle dispersion hardening. In an embodiment, the Nb content of the steel composition may vary within the range between about 0% to about 0.10%, preferably about 0% to about 0.04%.
Vanadium is an element whose addition may be used to increase the strength of the steel by carbide precipitations during tempering. However if V content of the steel composition is greater than about 0.15%, a large volume fraction of vanadium carbide particles may be formed, with an attendant reduction in toughness of the steel. Therefore, in certain embodiments, the V content of the steel is limited to about 0.15%, preferably to about 0.10%.
Aluminum is an element whose addition to the steel composition has a deoxidizing effect during the steel making process and further refines the grain size of the steel. In an embodiment, if the Al content of the steel composition is less than about 0.010%, the steel may be susceptible to oxidation, exhibiting high levels of inclusions. In other embodiments, if the Al content of the steel composition greater than about 0.040%, coarse precipitates may be formed that impair the toughness of the steel. Therefore, the Al content of the steel composition may vary within the range between about 0.010% to about 0.040%.
Sulfur is an element that causes the toughness and workability of the steel to decrease. Accordingly, in some embodiments, the S content of the steel composition is limited to a maximum of about 0.010%, preferably about 0.003%.
Phosphorus is an element that causes the toughness of the steel to decrease. Accordingly, the P content of the steel composition limited to a maximum of about 0.015%, preferably about 0.010%.
Oxygen may be an impurity within the steel composition that is present primarily in the form of oxides. In an embodiment of the steel composition, as the O content increases, impact properties of the steel are impaired. Accordingly, in certain embodiments of the steel composition, a relatively low O content is desired, less than or equal to about 0.0050 wt %; preferably less than or equal to about 0.0015 wt %.
Calcium is an element whose addition to the steel composition may improve toughness by modifying the shape of sulfide inclusions. In an embodiment, the steel composition may comprise a minimum Ca to S content ratio of Ca/S>1.5. In other embodiments of the steel composition, excessive Ca is unnecessary and the steel composition may comprise a maximum content Ca of about 0.05%, preferably about 0.03%.
The contents of unavoidable impurities including. hut not limited to N. Pb, Sn, As, Sb, Bi and the like are preferably kept as low as possible. However, properties (e.g., strength, toughness) of steels formed from embodiments of the steel compositions of the present disclosure may not be substantially impaired provided these impurities are maintained below selected levels. In one embodiment, the N content of the steel composition may be less than about 0.010%, preferably less than or equal to about 0.008%. In another embodiment, the Pb content of the steel composition may be less than or equal to about 0.005%. In a further embodiment. the Sri content of the steel composition may be less than or equal to about 0.02%. In an additional embodiment, the As content of the steel composition may be less than or equal to about 0.012%. In another embodiment, the Sb content of the steel composition may be less than or equal to about 0.008%. In a further embodiment, the Bi content of the steel composition may be less than or equal to about 0.003%.
The selection of a specific steel chemistry of this disclosure will depend on the final product specification and industrial facility constrains (for example in induction heat treatment lines it is difficult to achieve large soaking times during tempering). Mn addition will be reduced when possible because it impairs fatigue life and SSC resistance through the formation of large segregation patterns. Cr and to a less extent Mo will be used to replace Mn, and the full body heat treatment is kept as simple as possible. Both elements increase carbide stability and softening resistance, which may lead to large soaking times during tempering. Thereafter, these elements are preferred for the higher strength grades (for example Grade 110 and above) for which tempering resistance is desired, and avoided in the lower ones (Grade 80) for which long and impractical industrial heat treatment lines would be needed.
In the case of the lower grades (Grade 80), it will be preferred B and Ti microalloyed additions in combination with suitable C contents. These elements allow for achieving good hardenability without the use of high Mn additions. Moreover, B and Ti do not increase tempering resistance. Thereafter, simple and short tempering treatment can be used to achieve the desired strength level.
The industrial processing route corresponding to this disclosure is described in the following paragraphs, making focus on the Full Body Heat Treatment (FBHT) conditions.
Raw material for coiled tubing is produced in a steel shop as hot rolled strips with wall thickness that may vary from about 0.08 inches to about 0.30 inches. Controlled rolling may be used by the steel supplier to refine the as rolled microstructure. However, an important microstructural refinement of the as roiled strips is not needed, because in this disclosure microstructure and mechanical properties are mostly defined by the final FBHT. This flexibility in the hot rolling process helps to reduce raw-material cost, and allows to use steel chemistries not available when complex hot rolling procedures can be used (in general controlled rolling can be applied only to low carbon micro-alloyed steels).
The steel strips are longitudinally cut to the width for pipe, production. Afterwards, the strips are joined end to end through a welding process (e.g. Plasma Arc Welding or Friction Stir Welding) to form a longer strip that allows to achieve the pipe length. These welded strips are formed into a pipe using, for example an ERW process. Typical coiled tube outer diameters are between 1 inch and 5 inches. Pipe lengths are about 15,000 feet, but lengths can be between about 10,000 feet to about 40000 feet.
After forming the pipe, the Full Body Heat Treatment (FBHT) is applied. The objective of this heat treatment is to produce a homogeneous final microstructure composed of at least 90% tempered martensite, the rest being bainite. This microstructure, having uniform carbide distribution and grain size below 20 μm—preferably below 15 μm—guarantees good combinations of strength, ductility, toughness and low cycle fatigue life. Furthermore, as was previously mentioned, by properly selecting the steel chemistry this type of microstructure is suitable to improve Sulfide Stress Cracking (SSC) resistance in comparison with conventional structures, composed of ferrite, pearlite and large volume fractions of upper bainite.
The FBHT is composed of at least one austenitization and quenching cycle (Q) followed by a tempering treatment (T). The austenitization is performed at temperatures between 900° C. and 1000° C. During this stage the total time of permanence above the equilibrium temperature Ae3 should be selected to guarantee a complete dissolution of iron carbides without having excessive austenitic grain growth. The target grain size is below 20 μm, preferably below 15 ∞m. Quenching has to be performed controlling the minimum cooling rate in order to achieve a final as quenched microstructure composed of at least 90% martensite throughout the pipe.
Tempering is carried out at temperatures between 550° C. and 720° C. Heat treatment above 720° C. may led to partial martensite transformation to high carbon austenite. This constituent has to be avoided because tends to transform into brittle constituents, which may impair toughness and fatigue life. On the other hand, if tempering is performed below 550° C. the recovery process of the dislocated as quenched structure is not complete. Thereafter, toughness may be again strongly reduced. The tempering cycle has to be selected, within the above mentioned temperature range, in order to achieve the desired mechanical properties. Minimum yield strength may vary from 80 ksi to 140 ksi. An appropriate time of permanence at temperature has to be selected to guarantee an homogeneous carbide distribution in both base tube and weld areas (ERW line and strip to strip joints). In some cases, in order to improve the combination of strength and toughness more than one austenitization, quenching and tempering cycles may be performed. After FBHT the pipe may be subjected to a sizing process, in order to guarantee specified dimensional tolerances, stress relieved and spooled into a coil.
As was previously mentioned, the microstructure of this disclosure is composed of at least 90% tempered martensite with an homogenous distribution of fine carbides, the rest being bainite. This microstructure allows for production of a coiled tube with the desired combination of high strength, extended low cycle fatigue life and improved SSC resistance.
The tempered martensite is obtained by at least one heat treatment of quenching and tempering, performed after the pipe is formed by ERW. The heat treatment may be repeated two or more times if additional refinement is desired for improving SSC resistance. This is because subsequent cycles of austenization and quenching reduce not only prior austenitic grain size, but also martensite block and packet sizes.
To obtain the target microstructure with good hardenability, at least 90% martensite has to be formed at the end of the quenching process. An adequate chemistry selection is paramount to achieve such volume fraction of martensite. The selection of suitable steel compositions was based on results from experiments performed with a thermo-mechanical simulator Gleeble® 3500. Industrial trials were performed afterwards to confirm laboratory findings.
Some of the steel chemistries analyzed in laboratory are listed in Table A1. For all these chemistries dilatometric tests were carried out at Gleeble® to construct Continuous Cooling Transformation (CCT) diagrams. The CCT diagrams were used, in combination with metallographic analysis of the samples obtained from the simulations, to determine the minimum cooling rate to have more than 90% martensite. This critical cooling rate, mainly dependent on steel chemistry, will be referred as CR90.
Examples of obtained CCT diagrams are presented in
In
STD1, STD2, and STD3 have critical cooling rates above 30° C./s, thereafter these steels are not suitable for this disclosure. On the other hand, hardenability is adequate in BTi2 and CrMoBTi3 steels. The hardenability improvement is due to an increased carbon content and the B—Ti addition.
In Table A2 is shown the critical cooling rates measured for the steels of Table A1, STD1, STD2 and STD3 are chemistries currently used for coiled tubes grades 80, 90 and 110; and fulfill API 5ST. However, even the more alloyed STD3 have a critical cooling rate to guarantee more than 90% tempered martensite in pipes with WT in the range of interest. It is clear that standard materials are not adequate to produce the target microstructure of this disclosure and hardenability has to be improved. In low alloy steels the roost important element affecting hardenability is Carbon. Thereafter, C was increased above the maximum specified by API 5ST (0.16 wt. %) to have critical cooling rates not higher than 30° C./s, in this disclosure Carbon addition is in the range from 0.17% to 0.35% (the maximum level was selected to guarantee good weldability and toughness), As was just mentioned, the rest of the chemistry has to be adjusted to have CR90 values equal or lower than 30° C./s.
The following guidelines for selecting adequate steel chemistries were obtained from the analysis of experimental results in Table A2:
C—Mn steels: hardenability depends mainly on Carbon and Manganese additions. About 2% Mn can be used to achieve the desired hardenability when C is in the lower limit (CMn1 steel). However, Mn is an element which produces strong segregation patterns that may decrease fatigue life. Thereafter, Mn addition is decreased in higher Carbon formulations. For example, when carbon concentration is about 0.25%, 1.6% Mn is enough to achieve the hardenability (CMn2 steel).
B—Ti steels: these alloys are plain carbon steels microalloyed with Boron and Titanium. Due to the increase in hardenability associated to the Boron effect, Mn can be further reduced. For Carbon in the lower limit, about 1.6% Mn can be used to achieve the hardenability. When carbon concentration is about 0.25%, 1.3% Mn is enough to achieve the hardenability (BTi2 steel).
Cr—Mo steels: these steels have Cr and Mo additions that are useful to increase tempering resistance, which make them suitable for ultra-high strength grades. Additionally, Cr and Mo are elements that improve hardenability; so Mn addition may be further reduced. However, Cr and Mo are costly additions that reduce the steel hot workability, and their maximum content is limited to 1% and 0.5%, respectively. In one example with Carbon in the lower limit, about 1% Mn can be used to achieve the CR90 (CrMo1), If the steel is also microalloyed with B—Ti. a further reduction in Mn to 0.6% can be performed (CrMoBTi1).
To analyze tempering behavior of the steels presented in Table A1, simulations of industrial heat treatments were performed at Gleeble® Simulations consisted in an austenitization at 900-950° C. quenching at 30° C./sec and tempering. In the particular case of STD1, STD2 and STD3 steels higher cooling rates were used in order to achieve at least 90% martensite during quenching. For STD1 and STD2 a quenching rate of about 150° C./s was used, while for STD3 cooling was at 50° C./s. These higher cooling rates can be achieved in small samples at Gleeble® when external water cooling is applied. After quenching the samples were tempered using two types of cycles:
Peak like cycle: Heating at 50° C./s up to a maximum temperature (Tmax) that was in the range from 550° C. to 720° C. Cooling at about 1.5° C./s down to room temperature. These cycles were intended to simulate actual tempering conditions at induction furnaces, which are characterized by high healing rate, no soaking time at maximum temperature and air cooling.
Isothermal cycle: Heating at 50° C./s up to 710° C., soaking at this temperature during a time that ranged from 1 min to 1 hour and cooling at about 1.5° C./s. This cycle was used to simulate tempering in an industrial line with several soaking inductors or with a tunnel furnace.
In all cases tempering temperature ranged from 550° C. to 720° C. Temperatures higher than 720° C. were avoided because non-desired re-austenitization takes place. On the other hand, if tempering is performed below 550° C., recovery of the dislocated structure is not complete, and the material presents brittle constituents that may impair fatigue life.
Peak-like tempering cycles are preferred to reduce line length and to improve productivity. Thereafter, the feasibility of obtaining a given grade with a specific steel chemistry was mainly determined by the tempering curve obtaining using this type of cycles. If after a peak-like tempering at 720° C. strength is still high for the grade, soaking at maximum temperature can be performed. However, as soaking time increases, larger, more expensive and less productive industrial lines may be needed.
In
Based on the results obtained from Gleeble® simulations, Table B1 was constructed. This Table shows, for each analyzed steel, the feasibility of producing different grades, which ranged from 80 Ksi to 140 Ksi of minimum yield strength. For example, in the case of BTi2 it is feasible to reach grades 90 to 125 using peak-like tempering cycles. But 2 minutes of soaking at 720° C. can be used in the case of Grade 80, which is why the in corresponding cell “soaking” is indicated.
From the results obtained is clear that in order to obtain the higher grades, increased Carbon and Cr—Mo additions can be used. Particularly. Grade 140 cannot be achieved with standard chemistries, as described in API5ST, because of the low Carbon content. On the other hand, to reach Grade 80 a lean chemistry with low carbon, no Cr or Mo additions are the best options. In this case, B—Ti microalloying additions may be used to guarantee good hardenability (for example, a chemistry like BTi1 is a good alternative).
It is important to mention that in order to produce martensitic structures with the standard steels (STD1, STD2 and STD3) it was necessary to use at laboratory higher quenching rates than achievable at the mill. Thereafter, if we limit the cooling rate to that industrially achievable, none of the coiled tube grades can be obtained with conventional steels using the FBHT processing route.
During steel solidification alloying elements tend to remain diluted in the liquid because of its higher solubility in comparison with the solid (δ ferrite or austenite). Solute rich areas form two types of non-uniform chemical composition patterns upon solidification: microsegregation and macrosegregation.
Microsegregation results from freezing the solute-enriched liquid in the interdendritic spaces. But it does not constitute a major problem, since the effects of microsegregation can be removed during subsequent hot working. On the other hand, macrosegregation is non-uniformity of chemical composition in the cast section on a larger scale. It cannot be completely eliminated by soaking at high temperature and/or hot working. In the case of interest for this disclosure, which is the continuous slab cast, it produces the centerline segregation band.
A pronounced central segregation band has to be avoided because:
Brittle constituents as non-tempered martensite may appear in this region as a result of welding operations (bias weld and ERW, see for example
After FBHT the remnant of the central segregation band is a region enriched in substitutional solutes (as Mn, Si, Mo) with a higher density of coarse carbides than the rest of the material. This region is susceptible to nucleate cracks during low cycle fatigue, as it is observed in
Although it is not possible to remove macrosegregation, its negative effects on toughness, fatigue life and SSC resistance can be reduced by a proper selection of steel chemistry.
Based on EDX measurements on samples corresponding to a wide range of steel chemistries, enrichment factors at the central segregation band were estimated for different alloying elements. The results are shown in Table C1. The enrichment factors (EF) are the ratios between each element concentration at the central band and that corresponding to the average in the matrix. These factors are mainly dependent on thermodynamic partition coefficient between liquid and solid; and diffusivities during solidification.
Table C1 shows clearly that there are some elements that have a strong tendency to segregate during solidification, like, Si and Cu. On the other hand Cr and Ni have low enrichment factors. Ni is a costly addition, but Cr may be used when an increase in hardenability and/or tempering resistance is desired without producing strong segregation patterns.
The enrichment factors give information about the increase in concentration that can be expected for each element at the central segregation band. However, not all these elements have the same effect regarding the material tendency to form brittle constituents during welding or heat treatment. It is observed that the higher the improvement on hardenability, the higher the tendency to form brittle constituents during processing. It is important to mention that elements with high diffusion coefficients as Carbon and Boron may segregate during solidification, but are homogenized during hot rolling. Thereafter, they do not contribute to form brittle constituents localized at the segregation band.
From the analysis of the CCT diagrams (Example A) it can be concluded that Manganese produces the strongest increase in hardenability. This is apart from Carbon and Boron, which do not present large segregation patterns after hot rolling. On the other hand, Si and Cu, which have a strong tendency to segregate, do not play a major role on hardenability. Because of its high enrichment factor and large effect on hardenability, Mn addition has to be reduced as much as possible when trying to diminish the negative effects of macro-segregation, as the reduction in low-cycle fatigue life.
High Mn contents are ordinarily added to the steel composition because of its effect on hardenability. In this disclosure the hardenability is mostly achieved through the higher Carbon addition, so Mn concentration can be generally reduced. Further Manganese reductions can be achieved using Boron and/or Chromium additions. Examples can be seen in Table C2, which shows the critical cooling rate (CR90) for different steels composition obtained from CCT diagrams (data taken from a previous Example A). In order to achieve the hardenability in a steel with about 0.25% Carbon, Mn can be reduced from 1.6% to 1.3% when adding Boron, and further reduced to 0.4% if Cr—Mo is additionally used.
As was previously mentioned the fatigue life of coiled tubing is strongly dependent on microscopical features as microstructural heterogeneities. The combination of soft and hard micro-constituents tends to produce plastic strain localization, which is the driving force for crack nucleation and propagation. In this section are compared the coiled tubing microstructures obtained with the standard production method applied to chemistries within API 5ST, and those corresponding to a chemistry and processing conditions within the ranges disclosed in this disclosure.
As reference material was used a standard coiled tubing grade 110 (yield strength from 110 Ksi to 120 Ksi) with chemistry named STD2 in Table A1, which is within API 5ST specification. This standard material was compared to a coiled tubed of the same grade produced with chemistry BTi2and applying the FBHT.
in this comparison different pipe locations will be considered:
Base Metal (BM): coiled tubing microstructure apart from the ERW line and bias welds, when “apart” means that are not included in this region the Heat Affected Zones (HAZ) produced during the any welding operation and their possible. Post-Weld Heat Treatment (PWHT).
Bias Weld (BW): microstructural region corresponding to the strip-to-strip joint that can be performed by Plasma Arc Welding (PAW), Friction Stir Welding. (FSW) or any other welding techniques. It is also included in this region the corresponding heat affected zone during welding and PWHT.
ERW line: microstructure resulting from the longitudinal ERW welding during tube forming and its localized PWHT, which is generally a seam annealing. As in previous cases, this region also includes the corresponding heat affected zone.
In
In
Microstructures corresponding to the HAL of the ERW are presented in
In
On the other hand, the bias weld microstructure in this disclosure is again very similar to that corresponding to the base metal. No upper bainite grains were observed. It is important to mention that some bainite may appear after the full body heat treatment, but because of the selection of adequate chemistry and processing conditions, the corresponding volume fraction of this constituent is lower than 10%. This is the main reason for the good hardenability to the chemistries described in this disclosure. Additionally, due to the upper limit in the austenitization temperature the final grain size is small (lower than 20 microns), then large bainitic laths that can propagate cracks are completely avoided.
Other examples of the microstructural homogeneity achievable by the combination of steel chemistry and processing conditions disclosed in this disclosure are presented in
In
In order to compare the performance of coiled tubing produced according to this disclosure with that corresponding to standard products, a series of tests were performed at laboratory. Coiled tube samples were tested in a fatigue machine schematically shown in
During testing, the fatigue specimens (tube pieces 5 or 6 feet long) are clamped on one end while an alternative force is applied by a hydraulic actuator on the opposite end. Deformation cycles are applied on the test specimens by bending samples over a curved mandrel of fixed radius, and then straightening them against a straight backup. Steel caps are welded at the ends of the specimen and connected to a hydraulic pump, so that cycling is conducted with the specimen filled with water at a constant internal pressure until it fails. The test ends when a loss of internal pressure occurs, due to the development of a crack through the wall thickness.
Testing was performed on coiled tubing with different chemistries and grades, as shown in Table E1. The pipe geometry was the same in all cases (OD 2″. WT 0.19″). STD1, STD2 and STD3 are steels within the limits described in API 5ST, processed following the standard route. BTi1, BTi2 and CrMoBTi4 are chemistries selected and processed according to this disclosure. It is important to mention that CrMoBTi4 steel was used to produce two non-standard grades with 125 Ksi and 140 Ksi of minimum yield strength (the highest grade described in API 5ST has 110 Ksi of SMYS). Tests were performed on tube pieces with and without the bias weld (in all cases the longitudinal ERW line is included in the samples). The severity of the test mainly depends on two parameters: bend radius and inner pressure. In this study the bend radius was 48 inches, which corresponds to a plastic strain of about 2%. Inner pressures between 1600 psi and 13500 psi were considered, producing hoop stresses that ranged from about 10% to 60% of the minimum yield strength of the grades.
In
In
In
Material performance in regards to hydrogen embrittlement in H2S containing environments is related to the combined effects of corrosive environments, presence of traps (e.g. precipitates and dislocations) that could locally increase hydrogen concentration, as well as the presence of brittle areas, in which cracks could easily propagate. A possible source of critical brittle regions in conventional coiled tubing material is the segregation pattern of substitutional elements, such as Mn, in the raw material. Regions of differential concentrations tend to respond in a distinct way to thermal cycles imposed during bias weld, PWHT, ERW and seam annealing, and could lead to the local formation of brittle constituents. In particular, when the material is seam annealed after the ERW process, the pipe body quickly extracts heat front the weld area. If the segregation is high enough, elongated high hardness areas with the possible presence of martensite may be formed as a consequence of the cooling conditions. These areas will remain in the tube to become easy paths for crack propagation. The fact that the new process is applied as the last stage of manufacturing, allows for the minimization of the excessively hardened areas. Other relevant differences are: a) the dislocations introduced during pipe cold forming are not present in the new product, b) the carbides in new product are smaller and isolated in comparison with the typical pearlite/bainite long brittle carbides. As a consequence the coiled tube produced with chemistries and processing conditions according to this disclosure presents an improved performance to cracking in HIS containing environments.
In order to perform a first analysis on resistance to SSC cracking, coiled tube Grade 80 samples produced by i) the standard process and ii) the new chemistry-process were evaluated using method C (C-ring) of NACE TM0177. Steel chemistries are shown in Table F1. Both materials (3 specimens in each case) were tested with the ERW seam at center of C-ring, sample, using the following conditions:
Load: 90% of 80Ksi, Solution A, 1 bar H2S. Test Time: 720 hs
In the case of the standard coiled tube all 3 specimens failed. On the other hand, the 3 samples corresponding to the new chemistry-process passed the test (
As shown in
In some embodiments, B—Ti and Cr—Mo additions can reduce maximum Mn. In some embodiments, grades may be higher than 110 that are difficult to achieve using the standard method.
Features, materials, characteristics, or groups described in conjunction with a particular aspect, embodiment, or example are to be understood to be applicable to any other aspect, embodiment or example described herein unless incompatible therewith. All of die features disclosed in this specification (including any accompanying claims, abstract and drawings), and/or all of the steps of any method or process so disclosed, may be combined in any combination, except combinations where at least some of such features and/or steps are mutually exclusive. The protection is not restricted to the details of any foregoing embodiments. The protection extends to any novel one, or any novel combination, of the features disclosed in this specification (including any accompanying claims, abstract and drawings), or to any novel one, or any novel combination of the steps of any method or process so disclosed.
While certain embodiments have been described, these embodiments have been presented by way of example only, and are not intended to limit the scope of protection. Indeed, the novel methods and apparatuses described herein may be embodied in a variety of other forms. Furthermore, various omissions, substitutions and changes in the form of the methods, compositions and apparatuses described herein may be made. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that in some embodiments, the actual steps taken in the processes illustrated and/or disclosed may differ from those shown in the figures. Depending on the embodiment, certain of the steps described above may be removed, others may be added. Furthermore, the features and attributes of the specific embodiments disclosed above may be combined in different ways to form additional embodiments, all of which fall within the scope of the present disclosure.
Although the present disclosure includes certain embodiments, examples and applications, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that the present disclosure extends beyond the specifically disclosed embodiments to other alternative embodiments and/or uses and obvious modifications and equivalents thereof, including embodiments which do not provide all of the features and advantages set forth herein. Accordingly, the scope of the present disclosure is not intended to be limited by the specific disclosures of preferred embodiments herein, and may be defined by claims as presented herein or as presented in the future.
This application is a continuation of application Ser. No. 15/665,054, filed Jul. 31, 2017, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 10,378,074, which is a continuation of application Ser. No. 14/190,886, filed Feb. 26, 2014, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,803,256 on Oct. 31, 2017, which claims priority to Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/783,701, filed Mar. 14, 2013, the entirety of each of which are hereby incorporated by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3316395 | Lavin | Apr 1967 | A |
| 3316396 | Trott et al. | Apr 1967 | A |
| 3325174 | Weaver | Jun 1967 | A |
| 3362731 | Gasche et al. | Jan 1968 | A |
| 3366392 | Kennel | Jan 1968 | A |
| 3413166 | Zackay et al. | Nov 1968 | A |
| 3489437 | Duret | Jan 1970 | A |
| 3512789 | Tanner | May 1970 | A |
| 3552781 | Helland | Jan 1971 | A |
| 3572777 | Blose et al. | Mar 1971 | A |
| 3575430 | Alpine | Apr 1971 | A |
| 3592491 | Glover | Jul 1971 | A |
| 3599931 | Hanson | Aug 1971 | A |
| 3655465 | Snape et al. | Apr 1972 | A |
| 3733093 | Seiler | May 1973 | A |
| 3810793 | Heller | May 1974 | A |
| 3854760 | Duret | Dec 1974 | A |
| 3889989 | Legris et al. | Jun 1975 | A |
| 3891224 | Ditcher | Jun 1975 | A |
| 3893919 | Flegel et al. | Jul 1975 | A |
| 3915697 | Giuliani et al. | Oct 1975 | A |
| 3918726 | Kramer | Nov 1975 | A |
| 3986731 | De Hoff | Oct 1976 | A |
| 4014568 | Carter et al. | Mar 1977 | A |
| 4147368 | Baker et al. | Apr 1979 | A |
| 4163290 | Sutherlin et al. | Jul 1979 | A |
| 4219204 | Pippert | Aug 1980 | A |
| 4231555 | Saito | Nov 1980 | A |
| 4299412 | Parmann | Nov 1981 | A |
| 4305059 | Benton | Dec 1981 | A |
| 4310163 | Pippert | Jan 1982 | A |
| 4336081 | Hijikata et al. | Jun 1982 | A |
| 4345739 | Wheatley | Aug 1982 | A |
| 4354882 | Greer | Oct 1982 | A |
| 4366971 | Lula | Jan 1983 | A |
| 4368894 | Parmann | Jan 1983 | A |
| 4373750 | Mantelle et al. | Feb 1983 | A |
| 4376528 | Ohshimatani et al. | Mar 1983 | A |
| 4379482 | Suzuki et al. | Apr 1983 | A |
| 4384737 | Reusser | May 1983 | A |
| 4406561 | Ewing | Sep 1983 | A |
| 4407681 | Ina et al. | Oct 1983 | A |
| 4426095 | Buttner | Jan 1984 | A |
| 4445265 | Olson et al. | May 1984 | A |
| 4473471 | Robichaud et al. | Sep 1984 | A |
| 4475839 | Strandberg | Oct 1984 | A |
| 4491725 | Pritchard | Jan 1985 | A |
| 4506432 | Smith | Mar 1985 | A |
| 4526628 | Ohno et al. | Jul 1985 | A |
| 4527815 | Smith | Jul 1985 | A |
| 4564392 | Tateo et al. | Jan 1986 | A |
| 4570982 | Blose et al. | Feb 1986 | A |
| 4591195 | Chelette et al. | May 1986 | A |
| 4592558 | Hopkins | Jun 1986 | A |
| 4601491 | Bell, Jr. et al. | Jul 1986 | A |
| 4602807 | Bowers | Jul 1986 | A |
| 4623173 | Handa et al. | Nov 1986 | A |
| 4629218 | Dubois | Dec 1986 | A |
| 4662659 | Blose et al. | May 1987 | A |
| 4674756 | Fallon et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
| 4688832 | Ortloff et al. | Aug 1987 | A |
| 4706997 | Carstensen | Nov 1987 | A |
| 4710245 | Roether | Dec 1987 | A |
| 4721536 | Koch et al. | Jan 1988 | A |
| 4758025 | Frick | Jul 1988 | A |
| 4762344 | Perkins et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
| 4812182 | Fang et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
| 4814141 | Imai et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
| 4844517 | Beiley et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
| 4856828 | Kessler et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
| 4955645 | Weems | Sep 1990 | A |
| 4958862 | Cappelli et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
| 4988127 | Cartensen | Jan 1991 | A |
| 5007665 | Bovisio et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
| 5067874 | Foote | Nov 1991 | A |
| 5137310 | Noel et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
| 5143381 | Temple | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5154534 | Guerin et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
| 5180008 | Aldridge et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
| 5191911 | Dubois | Mar 1993 | A |
| 5242199 | Hann et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
| 5328158 | Lewis et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
| 5348350 | Blose et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
| 5352406 | Barteri et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
| 5360239 | Klementich | Nov 1994 | A |
| 5449420 | Okada et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
| 5454883 | Yoshie et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
| 5456405 | Stagg | Oct 1995 | A |
| 5505502 | Smith et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
| 5515707 | Smith | May 1996 | A |
| 5538566 | Gallagher | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5592988 | Meroni et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
| 5598735 | Saito et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5653452 | Jarvenkyla | Aug 1997 | A |
| 5712706 | Castore et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
| 5794985 | Mallis | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5810401 | Mosing et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5860680 | Drijver et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5879030 | Clayson et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5879474 | Bhadeshia et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5944921 | Cumino et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5993570 | Gray | Nov 1999 | A |
| 6006789 | Toyooka et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6030470 | Hensger et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6044539 | Guzowksi | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6045165 | Sugino et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6056324 | Reimert et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6070912 | Latham | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6173968 | Nelson et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6188037 | Hamada et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6196530 | Muhr et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6217676 | Takabe et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6248187 | Asahi et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6257056 | Shibayama et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6267828 | Kushida et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6311965 | Muhr et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6331216 | Toyooka et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6347814 | Cerruti | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6349979 | Noel et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6358336 | Miyata | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6384388 | Anderson et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6412831 | Noel et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6447025 | Smith | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6478344 | Pallini, Jr. et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
| 6481760 | Noel et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6494499 | Galle, Sr. et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6514359 | Kawano | Feb 2003 | B2 |
| 6527056 | Newman | Mar 2003 | B2 |
| 6540848 | Miyata et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
| 6550822 | Mannella et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
| 6557906 | Carcagno | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6558484 | Onoe et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6581940 | Dittel | Jun 2003 | B2 |
| 6632296 | Yoshinaga et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
| 6648991 | Turconi et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
| 6669285 | Park et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6669789 | Edelman et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6682610 | Inoue | Jan 2004 | B1 |
| 6683834 | Ohara et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
| 6709534 | Kusinski et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
| 6752436 | Verdillon | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6755447 | Galle, Jr. et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
| 6764108 | Ernst et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
| 6767417 | Fujita et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
| 6814358 | Keck | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6851727 | Carcagno et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
| 6857668 | Otten et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
| 6883804 | Cobb | Apr 2005 | B2 |
| 6905150 | Carcagno et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
| 6921110 | Marotti et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
| 6958099 | Nakamura et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 6971681 | Dell'Erba et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
| 6991267 | Ernst et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 7014223 | Della Pina et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7066499 | Della Pina et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
| 7074283 | Omura | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7083686 | Itou | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7108063 | Carstensen | Sep 2006 | B2 |
| 7118637 | Kusinski et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7182140 | Wood | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7214278 | Kusinski et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7255374 | Carcagno et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
| 7264684 | Numata et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
| 7284770 | Dell'erba et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
| 7310867 | Corbett, Jr. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
| 7431347 | Ernst et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
| 7464449 | Santi et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
| 7475476 | Roussie | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7478842 | Reynolds, Jr. et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7506900 | Carcagno et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7621034 | Roussie | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7635406 | Numata et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
| 7735879 | Toscano et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7744708 | Lopez et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7753416 | Mazzaferro et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 7862667 | Turconi et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
| 8002910 | Tivelli et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8007601 | Lopez et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8007603 | Garcia et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8016362 | Itoga | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8262094 | Beele | Sep 2012 | B2 |
| 8262140 | Santi et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
| 8317946 | Arai et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
| 8328958 | Turconi et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8328960 | Gomez et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8333409 | Santi et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8414715 | Altschuler et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
| 8544304 | Santi | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8636856 | Altschuler | Jan 2014 | B2 |
| 8821653 | Anelli et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8840152 | Carcagno et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8926771 | Agazzi et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
| 9004544 | Carcagno et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
| 9163296 | Valdez et al. | Oct 2015 | B2 |
| 9187811 | Gomez et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
| 9222156 | Altschuler et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
| 9234612 | Santi et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
| 9340847 | Altschuler et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
| 9383045 | Santi et al. | Jul 2016 | B2 |
| 9598746 | Anellie et al. | Mar 2017 | B2 |
| 9708681 | Eguchi et al. | Jul 2017 | B2 |
| 9745640 | Valdez et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
| 9803256 | Valdez et al. | Oct 2017 | B2 |
| 20010035235 | Kawano | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20020011284 | Von Hagen et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020153671 | Raymond et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020158469 | Mannella et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20030019549 | Turconi et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030111146 | Kusinski et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030116238 | Fujita | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030155052 | Kondo et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030165098 | Ohara et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030168859 | Watts | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20040118490 | Klueh et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040118569 | Brill et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040131876 | Ohgami et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040139780 | Cai et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040187971 | Omura | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040195835 | Noel et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040262919 | Dutilleul et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050012278 | Delange | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050076975 | Lopez et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050087269 | Merwin | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050093250 | Santi et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050166986 | Dell'erba et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20060006600 | Roussie | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060124211 | Takano et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060137781 | Kusinski et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060157539 | Dubois | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060169368 | Lopez et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060231168 | Nakamura et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060231186 | Nakmura et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060243355 | Haiderer et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060273586 | Reynolds, Jr. et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20070039147 | Roussie | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070039149 | Roussie | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070089813 | Tivelli | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070137736 | Omura et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070216126 | Lopez et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070246219 | Manella et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20080047635 | Kanda et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080115863 | McCrink et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080129044 | Carcagno et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080219878 | Kanda et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080226396 | Garcia et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080226491 | Satou et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080257459 | Arai et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080264129 | Cheppe et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080286504 | Asahi et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080303274 | Mazzaferro et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080314481 | Garcia et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090010794 | Turconi et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090033087 | Carcagno et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090047166 | Tomomatsu et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090330807 | Carcagno et al. | Feb 2009 | |
| 20090101242 | Lopez et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090114318 | Arai et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090226491 | Satou et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090226988 | Tajima et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20100136363 | Valdez et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100187808 | Santi | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100193085 | Garcia | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100206553 | Bailey et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100294401 | Gomez | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100319814 | Perez | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100327550 | Lopez | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20110042946 | Santi | Feb 2011 | A1 |
| 20110077089 | Hirai et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110097235 | Turconi et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110133449 | Mazzaferro | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110233925 | Pina | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110247733 | Arai et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110259482 | Peters et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110284137 | Kami et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20120018056 | Nakagawa et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120186686 | Valdez | Jul 2012 | A1 |
| 20120199255 | Anelli | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120267014 | Hitoshio et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20130000790 | Arai et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130004787 | Ishiyama et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130199674 | Altschuler et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130264123 | Altschuler et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20140021244 | DuBois | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140027497 | Rowland et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140057121 | Altschuler et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140137992 | Ishiguro et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140251512 | Gomez | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140272448 | Valdez et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140299235 | Anelli | Oct 2014 | A1 |
| 20140299236 | Anelli | Oct 2014 | A1 |
| 20150368986 | Narikawa | Dec 2015 | A1 |
| 20160024625 | Valdez | Jan 2016 | A1 |
| 20160102856 | Minami | Apr 2016 | A1 |
| 20160281188 | Valdez et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
| 20160305192 | Buhler | Oct 2016 | A1 |
| 20180044747 | Valdez et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
| 20180051353 | Valdez et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
| 20200181730 | Duan | Jun 2020 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 0050159 | Oct 2006 | AR |
| 388791 | Aug 1989 | AT |
| 2414822 | Jun 2004 | CA |
| 2319926 | Jul 2008 | CA |
| 1401809 | Mar 2003 | CN |
| 1487112 | Apr 2004 | CN |
| 1292429 | Dec 2006 | CN |
| 101480671 | Jul 2009 | CN |
| 101542002 | Sep 2009 | CN |
| 101613829 | Dec 2009 | CN |
| 101413089 | Nov 2010 | CN |
| 101898295 | Dec 2010 | CN |
| 3310226 | Oct 1984 | DE |
| 4446806 | May 1996 | DE |
| 010037 | Jun 2008 | EA |
| 012256 | Aug 2009 | EA |
| 0032265 | Jul 1981 | EP |
| 0092815 | Nov 1983 | EP |
| 0104720 | Apr 1984 | EP |
| 0159385 | Oct 1985 | EP |
| 0309179 | Mar 1989 | EP |
| 0340385 | Nov 1989 | EP |
| 0329990 | Nov 1992 | EP |
| 0658632 | Jun 1995 | EP |
| 0753595 | Jan 1997 | EP |
| 0788850 | Aug 1997 | EP |
| 0828007 | Mar 1998 | EP |
| 0989196 | Mar 2000 | EP |
| 1 008 660 | Jun 2000 | EP |
| 01027944 | Aug 2000 | EP |
| 1 065 423 | Jan 2001 | EP |
| 828 007 | Nov 2001 | EP |
| 1 269 059 | Jan 2003 | EP |
| 1 277 848 | Jan 2003 | EP |
| 1 296 088 | Mar 2003 | EP |
| L 288 316 | Mar 2003 | EP |
| 1 362977 | Nov 2003 | EP |
| 1413639 | Apr 2004 | EP |
| 1 182 268 | Sep 2004 | EP |
| 1 705 415 | Sep 2006 | EP |
| 1 726 861 | Nov 2006 | EP |
| 1 876 254 | Jan 2008 | EP |
| 1 914 324 | Apr 2008 | EP |
| 2000629 | Dec 2008 | EP |
| 1554518 | Jan 2009 | EP |
| 2028284 | Feb 2009 | EP |
| 2133442 | Dec 2009 | EP |
| 2216576 | Aug 2010 | EP |
| 2239343 | Oct 2010 | EP |
| 2447386 | May 2012 | EP |
| 2729590 | Oct 2015 | EP |
| 1149513 | Dec 1957 | FR |
| 1489013 | Jul 1967 | FR |
| 2 704 042 | Oct 1994 | FR |
| 2 848 282 | Jun 2004 | FR |
| 2855587 | Dec 2004 | FR |
| 1717324 | Nov 2006 | FR |
| 498 472 | Jan 1939 | GB |
| 1 398 214 | Jun 1973 | GB |
| 1 428 433 | Mar 1976 | GB |
| 2 104 919 | Mar 1983 | GB |
| 2 234 308 | Jan 1991 | GB |
| 2 276 647 | Oct 1994 | GB |
| 2 388169 | Nov 2003 | GB |
| S522825 | Jan 1977 | JP |
| S58-19439 | Feb 1983 | JP |
| 58-187684 | Dec 1983 | JP |
| 60-086209 | May 1985 | JP |
| S60 11 6796 | Jun 1985 | JP |
| 60-215719 | Oct 1985 | JP |
| 36025719 | Oct 1985 | JP |
| S61-103061 | May 1986 | JP |
| 61 270355 | Nov 1986 | JP |
| 63 004046 | Jan 1988 | JP |
| 63 004047 | Jan 1988 | JP |
| 63-230847 | Sep 1988 | JP |
| 63230851 | Sep 1988 | JP |
| 01-242761 | Sep 1989 | JP |
| 01 259124 | Oct 1989 | JP |
| 01 259125 | Oct 1989 | JP |
| 01 283322 | Nov 1989 | JP |
| 05-098350 | Dec 1990 | JP |
| 403006329 | Jan 1991 | JP |
| 04 021718 | Jan 1992 | JP |
| 04 107214 | Apr 1992 | JP |
| 04 231414 | Aug 1992 | JP |
| 05 287381 | Nov 1993 | JP |
| H06-042645 | Feb 1994 | JP |
| 06-093339 | Apr 1994 | JP |
| 06 172859 | Jun 1994 | JP |
| 06-220536 | Aug 1994 | JP |
| 07-003330 | Jan 1995 | JP |
| 07 041856 | Feb 1995 | JP |
| 07-13 9666 | May 1995 | JP |
| 07 197125 | Aug 1995 | JP |
| 20102703 94 | Aug 1996 | JP |
| 08 311551 | Nov 1996 | JP |
| 09 067624 | Mar 1997 | JP |
| H09-201688 | Aug 1997 | JP |
| 09-235617 | Sep 1997 | JP |
| 2704042 | Oct 1997 | JP |
| 10 140250 | May 1998 | JP |
| 10 176239 | Jun 1998 | JP |
| 10 280037 | Oct 1998 | JP |
| 11 050148 | Feb 1999 | JP |
| 11 140580 | May 1999 | JP |
| 11 229079 | Aug 1999 | JP |
| 2000-063940 | Feb 2000 | JP |
| 2000-178645 | Jun 2000 | JP |
| 2000-248337 | Sep 2000 | JP |
| 2000-313919 | Nov 2000 | JP |
| 2001-131698 | May 2001 | JP |
| 2001-164338 | Jun 2001 | JP |
| 2001-172739 | Jun 2001 | JP |
| 2001-220653 | Aug 2001 | JP |
| 2001-271134 | Oct 2001 | JP |
| 2002-096105 | Apr 2002 | JP |
| 2002-130554 | May 2002 | JP |
| 2004-011009 | Jan 2004 | JP |
| 2007-031769 | Jul 2005 | JP |
| 60 174822 | Sep 2005 | JP |
| 0245031 | Mar 2000 | KR |
| 1418 | Dec 1994 | KZ |
| 2506 | Sep 1995 | KZ |
| 2673 | Dec 1995 | KZ |
| 51138 | Nov 2002 | UA |
| WO 1984002947 | Aug 1984 | WO |
| WO 199429627 | Dec 1994 | WO |
| WO 199622396 | Jul 1996 | WO |
| WO 200006931 | Feb 2000 | WO |
| WO 200070107 | Nov 2000 | WO |
| WO 2001 075345 | Oct 2001 | WO |
| WO 200188210 | Nov 2001 | WO |
| WO 200229290 | Apr 2002 | WO |
| WO 2002035128 | May 2002 | WO |
| WO 2002068854 | Sep 2002 | WO |
| WO 2002086369 | Oct 2002 | WO |
| WO 2002093045 | Nov 2002 | WO |
| WO 2003033856 | Apr 2003 | WO |
| WO 2003048623 | Jun 2003 | WO |
| WO 2003087646 | Oct 2003 | WO |
| WO 2004023020 | Mar 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004031420 | Apr 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004033951 | Apr 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004053376 | Jun 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004097059 | Nov 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004109173 | Dec 2004 | WO |
| WO 2006003775 | Jun 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005080621 | Sep 2005 | WO |
| WO 2006009142 | Jan 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006087361 | Apr 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006078768 | Jul 2006 | WO |
| WO 2007002576 | Jan 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007017082 | Feb 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007017161 | Feb 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007023806 | Mar 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007028443 | Mar 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007034063 | Mar 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007063079 | Jun 2007 | WO |
| WO 2008003000 | Jan 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008007737 | Jan 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008090411 | Jul 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008110494 | Sep 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008127084 | Oct 2008 | WO |
| WO 2009000851 | Dec 2008 | WO |
| WO 2009000766 | Jan 2009 | WO |
| WO 2009010507 | Jan 2009 | WO |
| WO 2009027308 | Mar 2009 | WO |
| WO 2009027309 | Mar 2009 | WO |
| WO 2009044297 | Apr 2009 | WO |
| WO 2009065432 | May 2009 | WO |
| WO 2009106623 | Sep 2009 | WO |
| WO 2010061882 | Jun 2010 | WO |
| WO 2010122431 | Oct 2010 | WO |
| WO 2011152240 | Dec 2011 | WO |
| WO 2013007729 | Jan 2013 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| U.S. Appl. No. 15/788,534, filed Oct. 19, 2017, Valdez. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 16/538,407, filed Aug. 12, 2019, Valdez. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 14/872,490, filed Oct. 1, 2015, Valdez. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 15/076,305, filed Mar. 27, 2017, Valdez. |
| “Seamless Steel Tubes for Pressure Purposes—Technical Delivery Conditions—Part 1: Non-alloy Steel Tubes with Specified Room Temperature Properties” British Standard BS EN 10216-1:2002 E:1-26, published May 2002. |
| “Seamless Steel Tubes for Pressure Purposes—Technical Delivery Conditions—Part 2: Non-alloy and Alloy Steel Tubes with Specified Elevated Temperature Properties” British Standard BS EN 10216-2:2002+A2:2007: E: 1-45, published Aug. 2007. |
| “Seamless Steel Tubes for Pressure Purposes—Technical Delivery Conditions—Part 3: Alloy Fine Grain Steel Tubes” British Standard BS EN 10216-3:2002 +A 1 :2004 E: 1-34, published Mar. 2004. |
| “Seamless Steel Tubes for Pressure Purposes—Technical Delivery Conditions—Part 4: Non-alloy and Alloy Steel Tubes with Specified Low Temperature Properties” British Standard BS EN 10216-4:2002 + A 1 :2004 E: 1-30, published Mar. 2004. |
| [No Author Listed], “Coiled Tubing String Design,” Unknown if this document was publicly disclosed, 2 pages. |
| [No Author Listed], “Cymax Division—Coiled Tubing Reel Sizes,” Unknown if this document was publicly disclosed, 1 page. |
| [No Author Listed], “Orbital TIG Welding Cymax Coiled Tubing,” Unknown if this document was publicly disclosed, but dated Nov. 1992, 13 pages. |
| [No Author Listed], “Southwestern Pipe, Inc.—Cymax Coiled Tubing,” Unknown if this document was publicly disclosed, but dated Jan. 1992, 1 page. |
| [No Author Listed], “The Development and Testing of CYMAX 100 Coiled Tubing,” This document is dated Jan. 1992 and is cited in the bibliography of the Full Body Quenched and Tempered Coiled Tubing dated Mar. 1, 1994, 15 pages. |
| Aggarwal, R. K., et al.: “Qualification of Solutions for Improving Fatigue Life at SCR Touch Down Zone”, Deep Offshore Technology Conference, Nov. 8-10, 2005, Vitoria, Espirito Santo, Brazil, in 12 pages. |
| Anelli, E., D. Colleluori, M. Pontremoli, G. Cumino, A Izquierdo, H. Quintanilla, “Metallurgical design of advanced heavy wall seamless pipes for deep-water applications”, 4th International Conference on Pipeline Technology, May 9 to 13, 2004, Ostend, Belgium. |
| Asahi, et al., Development of Ultra-high-strength Linepipe, X120, Nippon Steel Technical Report, Jul. 2004, Issue 90, pp. 82-87. |
| ASM Handbook, Mechanical Tubing and Cold Finishing, Metals Handbook Desk Edition, (2000), 5 pages. |
| ASTM A 182/ A 182M “Standard Specification for Forged or Rolled Alloy and Stainless Steel Pipe Flanges, Forged Fittings, and Valves and Parts for High-Temperature Service.” |
| ASTM A 213/A 213M “Standard Specification for Seamless Ferritic and Austenitic Alloy-Steel Boiler, Superheater, and Heat-Exchanger Tubes.” |
| ASTM A336/A336M “Standard Specification for Alloy Steel Forgings for Pressure and High-Temperature Parts.” |
| ASTM A355 which is related to “Seamless Ferritic Alloy-Steel Pipe for High-Temperature Service” |
| ASTM, “E112-13 Standard Test Methods for Determining Average Grain Size,” ASTM International. 2012, p. 1-28. |
| Bai, M., D. Liu, Y. Lou, X. Mao, L. Li, X. Huo, “Effects of Ti addition on low carbon hot strips produced by CSP process”, Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing, 2006, vol. 13, N° 3, p. 230. |
| Beretta, Stefano et al., “Fatigue Assessment of Tubular Automotive Components in Presence of Inhomogeneities”, Proceedings of IMECE2004, ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress, Nov. 13-19, 2004, pp. 1-8. |
| Berner, Robert A, “Tetragonal Iron Sulfide”, Science, Aug. 31, 1962, vol. 137, Issue 3531, pp. 669. |
| Berstein et al.,“The Role of Traps in the Microstructural Control of Hydrogen Embrittlement of Steels” Hydrogen Degradation of Ferrous Alloys, Ed. T. Oriani, J. Hirth, and M. Smialowski, Noyes Publications, 1988, pp. 641-685. |
| Bhadeshia et al., “Steels, Microstructure and Properties,” Third Edition, Elsevier, Published in 2006, pp. 296. |
| Boulegue, Jacques, “Equilibria in a sulfide rich water from Enghien-les-Bains, France”, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Pergamon Press, 1977, vol. 41, pp. 1751-1758, Great Britain. |
| Bruzzoni et al., “Study of Hydrogen Permeation Through Passive Films on Iron Using Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy”, PhD Thesis, 2003, Universidad Nacional del Comahue de Buenos Aires, Argentina (Abstract). |
| Cancio et al., “Characterization of microalloy precipitates in the austenitic range of high strength low alloy steels”, Steel Research, 2002, vol. 73, pp. 340-346. |
| Carboni, A, A Pigani, G. Megahed, S. Paul, “Casting and rolling of API X 70 grades for artic application in a thin slab rolling plant”, Stahl u Eisen, 2008, N° 1, p. 131-134. |
| Chang, L.C., ““Microstructures and reaction kinetics of bainite transformation in Si-rich steels,”” XP0024874, Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 368, No. 1-2, Mar. 15, 2004, pp. 175-182, Abstract, Table 1. |
| Chitwood, G. B., et al.: “High-Strength Coiled Tubing Expands Service Capabilities”, as presented at the 24th Annual OTC in Houston, Texas, May 4-7, 1992, in 15 pages. |
| Clark, A Horrell, “Some Comments on the Composition and Stability Relations of Mackinawite”, Neues Jahrbuch fur Mineralogie, 1966, vol. 5, pp. 300-304, London, England. |
| Craig, Bruce D., “Effect of Copper on the Protectiveness of Iron Sulfide Films”, Corrosion, National Association of Corrosion Engineers, 1984, vol. 40, Issue 9, pp. 471-474. |
| D.O.T. 178.68 Spec. 39, pp. 831-840, Non reusable (non refillable) cylinders, Oct. 1, 2002. |
| Davis, J.R., et al. “ASM—Speciality Handbook—Carbon and alloy steels” ASM Speciality Handbook, Carbon and Alloy Steels, 1996, pp. 12-27, XP002364757 US. |
| De Medicis, Rinaldo, ““Cubic FeS, A Metastable Iron Sulfide””, Science, American Association For The Advancement of Science, Steen bock Memorial Library, Dec. 11, 1970, vol. 170, Issue 3963, pp. 723-728. |
| Drill Rod Joint Depth Capacity Chart, downloaded Jan. 15, 2013; http://www. boartlongyear. com/d ri 11-rod-joi nt-depth-capacity-chart. |
| E. Anelli, et al., “Metallurgical Design of Advanced Heavy Wall Seamless pipes for Deepwater Applications”, 4th International Conference on Pipeline Technology, May 9-13, 2004, Ostend, Belgium. |
| Echaniz, “The effect of micro structure on the KISSC of low alloy carbon steels”, NACE Corrosion '98, EE, UU,, Mar. 1998, pp. 22-27, San Diego. |
| Echaniz, G., Morales, C., Perez, T., “Advances in Corrosion Control and Materials in Oil and Gas Production” Papers from Eurocorr 97 and Eurocorr 98, 13, P. S. Jackman and L. M. Smith, Published for the European Federation of Corrosion, No. 26, European Federation of Corrosion Publications, 1999. |
| European Extended Search Report re EPO Application No. 12152516.6, dated Jun. 25, 2012. |
| European Office Action in European Application No. 14159174.3 dated Jan. 12, 2018, 4 pages. |
| European Office Action in European Application No. 14159174.3 dated Sep. 16, 2016, 4 pages. |
| European Search Report and Opinion, re EPO Application No. EP 14159174.3, dated Jul. 3, 2014. |
| European Search Report in European Application No. 14159174.3, dated Jul. 10, 2014. 5 pages. |
| Extrait du Catalogue N 940, 1994. |
| Fang, Hong-Sheng, et al.: “The Developing Prospect of Air-cooled Bainitic Steels”, International Journal of Issi, vol. 2, No. 2, Feb. 1, 2005, pp. 9-18. |
| Faszold et al., “Full-Scale Fatigue Testing With 130K Yield Tubing.” Paper SPE-153945, Presented at SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing & Well Intervention Conference and Exhibition Jan. 2012, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 6 pages. |
| Fratini et al.: “Improving friction stir welding of blanks of different thicknesses,” Materials Science and Engineering A 459 (2007). |
| Fritz T et al., “Characterization of electroplated nickel”, Microsystem Technologies, Dec. 31, 2002, vol. 9, No. 1-2, pp. 87-91, Berlin, DE. |
| Gojic, Mirko and Kosec, Ladislav, , “The Susceptibility to the Hydrogen Embrittlement of Low Alloy Cr and CrMo Steels”, ISIJ International, 1997, vol. 37, Issue 4, pp. 412-418. |
| Gomez, G., et al.: “Air cooledbainitic steels for strong, seamless pipes—Part 1—allowy design, kinetics and micro structure”, Materials Science and Technology, vol. 25, No. 12, Dec. 1, 2009. (XP002611498). |
| Heckmann, et al., Development of low carbon Nb—Ti—B microalloyed steels for high strength large diameter linepipe, Ironmaking and Steelmaking, 2005, vol. 32, Issue 4, pp. 337-341. |
| Hollomon, J.H., et al., Time-tempered Relations in Tempering Steel. New York Meeting, pp. 223-249, 1945. |
| Howells, et al.: “Challenges for Ultra-Deep Water Riser Systems”, I IR, London, Apr. 1997, 11 pages. |
| Hutchings et al., “Ratio of Specimen thickness to charging area for reliable hydrogen permeation measurement,” British Corrosion. Journal, 1993, vol. 28, Issue 4, pp. 309-312. |
| Iino et al., “Aciers pour pipe-lines resistant an cloquage et an criquage dus a l'hydrogene”, Revue de Metallurgie, 1979, vol. 76, Issue 8-9, pp. 591-609. |
| Ikeda et al., “Influence of Environmental Conditions and Metallurgical Factors on Hydrogen Induced Cracking of Line Pipe Steel”, Corrosion/SO, National Association of Corrosion Engineers, 1980, vol. 8, pp. 8/1-8/18, Houston, Texas. |
| International Standard Publication. Petroleum and natural gas industries—Materials for use in H2Scontaining environments in oil and gas production. ANSI/NACE ISO, 145 pages, 2009. |
| Izquierdo, et al.: “Qualification of Weldable X65 Grade Riser Sections with Upset Ends to Improve Fatigue Performance of Deepwater Steel Catenary Risers”, Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Vancouver, BC, Canada, Jul. 6-11, 2008, p. 71. |
| Jacobs, Lucinda and Emerson, Steven, “Trace Metal Solubility in an Anoxid Fjord”, Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, 1982, vol. 60, pp. 237-252, Amsterdam, Netherlands. |
| Johnston, P. W., G.Brooks, “Effect of A1203 and Ti02 Additions on the Lubrication Characteristics of Mould Fluxes”, Molten Slags, Fluxes and Salts ⋅97 Conference, 1997 pp. 845-850. |
| Kazutoshi Ohashi et al., “Evaluation of r-value of steels using Vickers hardness test”, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Aug. 7, 2012, p. 12045, vol. 379, No. 1, Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol, GB. |
| Keizer, Joel, “Statistical Thermodynamics of Nonequilibrium Processes”, Springer-Verlag, 1987. |
| Kishi, T., H.Takeucgi, M.Yamamiya, H.Tsuboi, T.Nakano, T.Ando, “Mold Powder Technology for Continuous Casting of Ti-Stabilized Stainless Steels”, Nippon Steel Technical Report, No. 34, Jul. 1987, pp. 11-19. |
| Korolev, D. F., “The Role of Iron Sulfides in the Accumulation of Molybdenum in Sedimentary Rocks of the Reduced Zone”, Geochemistry, 1958, vol. 4, pp. 452-463. |
| Lee, Sung Man and Lee, Jai Young, “The Effect of the Interface Character of TiC Particles on Hydrogen Trapping in Steel”, Acta Metal I., 1987, vol. 35, Issue 11, pp. 2695-2700. |
| Mechanical Tubing and Cold Finishing, Metals Handbook Desk Edition, (2000), 5 pages. |
| Mehling, Wilfred L.: “Hot Upset Forging,” ASM Handbook vol. 14, 1998, pp. 84-95. |
| Mishael, et al., “Practical Applications of Hydrogen Permeation Monitoring,” Corrosion, Mar. 28-Apr. 1, 2004, Corrosion 2004, Nacional Association of Corrosion Engineers, vol. Reprint No. 04476. |
| Morice et al., “Moessbauer Studies of Iron Sulfides”, J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem., 1969, vol. 31, pp. 3797-3802. |
| Mukongo, T., P.C.Pistorius, and A.M.Garbers-Craig, “Viscosity Effect of Titanium Pickup by Mould Fluxes for Stainless Steel”, Ironmaking and Steelmaking, 2004, vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 135-143. |
| Mullet et al., “Surface Chemistry and Structural Properties of Mackinawite Prepared by Reaction of Sulfide Ions with Metallic Iron”, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2002, vol. 66, Issue 5, pp. 829-836. |
| Murcowchick, James B. and Barnes, H.L., “Formation of a cubic FeS”, American Mineralogist, 1986, vol. 71, pp. 1243-1246. |
| Nace MR0175/ISO 15156-1 Petroleum and natural gas industries—Materials for use in H2S-containing Environments in oil and gas production—Part 1 : General principles for selection of crackina-resistant materials, Jun. 28, 2007. |
| Nagata, M., J. Speer, D. Matlock, “Titanium nitride precipitation behavior in thin slab cast high strength low alloyed steels”, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 2002 , vol. 33A, p. 3099-3110. |
| Nakai et al., “Development of Steels Resistant to Hydrogen Induced Cracking in Wet Hydrogen Sulfide Environment”, Transactions of the ISIJ, 1979, vol. 19, pp. 401-410. |
| Nandan et al.: “Recent advances in friction-stir welding—Process, weldment structure and properties,” Progress in Materials Science 53 (2008) 980-1023. |
| Pollack, Herman, W., Materials Science and Metallurgy, Fourth Edition, pp. 96 and 97, 1988. |
| Pressure Eguipment Directive 97/23/EC, May 29, 1997, downloaded from website: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/pressure equipment/ped/index en. html on Aug. 4, 2010. |
| Prevey, Paul, et al., “Introduction of Residual Stresses To Enhance Fatigue Performance in the Initial Design”, Proceedings of Turbo Expo 2004, Jun. 14-17, 2004, pp. 1-9. |
| Rickard, D.T., “The Chemistry of Iron Sulphide Formation at Low Temperatures”, Stockholm Contrib. Geo I., 1969, vol. 26, pp. 67-95. |
| Riecke, Ernst and Bohnenkamp, Konrad, “Uber den Einfluss von Gittersoerstellen in Eisen auf die X-abs Wassersroffdiffusion”, Z. Metallkde, 1984, vol. 75, pp. 76-81 (Abstract). |
| Savatori et al. European Commission Report, EUR 2006, EUR2207, 3 pp. STN_Abstract. |
| Shanabarger, M.R. and Moorhead, R. Dale, “H20 Adsorption onto clean oxygen covered iron films”, Surface Science, 1996, vol. 365, pp. 614-624. |
| Shoesmith, et al., “Formation of Ferrous Monosulfide Polymorphs During Corrosion of Iron by Aqueous Hydrogen Sulfide at 21 degrees C”, Journal of the Electrochemical Society, 1980, vol. 127, Issue 5, pp. 1007-1015. |
| Skoczylas, G., A Dasgupta, R. Bommaraju, “Characterization of the chemical interactions during casting of High-titanium low carbon enameling steels”, 1991 Steelmaking Conference Proceeding, pp. 707-717. |
| Smyth, D., et al.: Steel Tubular Products, Properties and Selection: Irons, Steels, and High-Performance Alloys, vol. 1, ASM Handbook, ASM International, 1990, p. 327-336. |
| Specification for Threading, Gauging and Thread Inspection of Casing, Tubing, and Line Pipe Threads, American Petroleum Institute, Specification 58, Apr. 2008, 15th Edition (Excerpts Only). |
| Spry, Alan, “Metamorphic Textures”, Perganon Press, 1969, New York. |
| Taira et al., “HIC and SSC Resistance of Line Pipes for Sour Gas Service”, Nippon Kokan Technical Report, 1981, vol. 31, Issue 1-13. |
| Taira et al., “Study on the Evaluation of Environmental Condition of Wet Sour Gas”, Corrosion 83 (Reprint. No. 156, National Association of Corrosion Engineers), 1983, p. 156/2-156/13, Houston, Texas. |
| Takeno et al., “Metastable Cubic Iron Sulfide—With Special Reference to Mackinawite”, American Mineralogist, 1970, vol. 55, pp. 1639-1649. |
| Tenaris brochure. Coiled Tubes HS80CRA, 2 pages, 2008. |
| Tenaris brochure. Coiled Tubes Suggested Field Welding Procedure (GTAW) for Coiled Tubing Grads HS70, HS80, HS90, HS11 0, 3 pages, 2007. |
| Tenaris brochure. Coiled Tubing for Down hole Applications, 10 pages, 2007. |
| Tenaris Newsletter for Pipeline Services, Apr. 2005, p. 1-8. |
| Tenaris Newsletter for Pipeline Services, May 2003, p. 1-8. |
| Thethi, et al.: “Alternative Construction for High Pressure High Temperature Steel Catenary Risers”, Opt USA, Sep. 2003, p. 1-13. |
| Thewlis, G., Weldability of X100 linepipe, Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, 2000, vol. 5, Issue 6, pp. 365-377. |
| Thompson et al., “Full Body Quenched and Tempered Coiled Tubing—Theory vs. Field Experience,” Presented at the Second International Conference and Exhibition on Coiled Tubing Technology: Operations, Services, Practices, held at Adams Mark hotel in Houston on or about Mar. 28-31, 1994, Mar. 1, 1994, 20 pages. |
| Tivelli et al., “Metakkurgical Aspects of Heavy Wall—High Strength Seamless Pipes for Deep Water Applications”, RioPipeline, Oct. 17-19, 2005, Rio, Brasil. |
| Tivelli, M., G. Cumino, A Izquierdo, E. Anelli, A Di Schino, “Metallurgical Aspects of Heavy Wall—High Strength Seamless Pipes for Deep Water Applications”, RioPipeline 2005, Oct. 17 to 19, 2005, Rio (Brasil), Paper n° IBP 1008 05. |
| Todoroki, T. Ishii, K. Mizuno, A Hongo, “Effect of crystallization behavior of mold flux on slab surface quality of a Ti-bearing Fe—Cr—Ni super alloy cast by means of continuous casting process”, Materials Science and Engineering A, 2005, vol. 413-414, p. 121-128. |
| Turconi, G. L.: “Improvement of resistance to SSC initiation and propagation of high strength OCTG through microstructure and precipitation control”; “Paper 01077”, NACE International, Houston, TX, Mar. 16, 2001. (XP009141583). |
| Vaughan, D. J. and Ridout, M.S., “Moessbauer Studies of Some Sulphide Minerals”, J. Inorg Nucl. Chem., 1971, vol. 33, pp. 741-746. |
| Wegst, C.W., “Stahlussel”, Auflage 1989, Seite 119, 2 pages. |
| Yu, et al.: “New steels and alloys in mechanical engineering I ed.,” M: Mechanical Engineering, 1976, p. 19. |
| “Southwestern Pipe Inc., Specification for Cymax 80 High Strength Low Alloy Steel Coiled Tubing for Sour Environment Service,” Date of publication unknown, but presumably prior to the earliest claimed priority date for the pending application; document bears the date Sep. 1, 93, 2 pages (28-29) of the 60 page composite document submitted herewith as Desig. ID 4,. |
| “Southwestern Pipe Inc., Specification for Cymax 100 High Strength Low Alloy Steel Coiled Tubing for Sour Environment Service,” Date of publication unknown, but presumably prior to the earliest claimed priority date for the pending application; document bears the date Sep. 1, 93, 2 pages (30-31) of the 60 page composite document submitted herewith as Desig. ID 4,. |
| Divider Pages labeled “Southwestern Pipe Inc.”; “CYMAX Division”; “Coiled Tubing Specifications”; “Technical Data - Introduction”; “Product Data - Specifications - Technical Papers” Date of publication unknown, but presumably prior to the earliest claimed priority date for the pending application; 4 pages (21, 23, 27, and 32) of the 60 page composite document submitted herewith as Desig. ID 4,. |
| “Untitled Composite of Multiple Documents”, CYMAX Division, Southwestern Pipe, Inc.; Date of publication unknown, but presumably prior to the earliest claimed priority date for the pending application, 60 pages; document is a composite of the documents submitted with an Information Disclosure Statement dated Aug. 16, 2019 as Desig. ID Nos. 472-476 and 568, and documents submitted herewith as Desig. ID Nos. 1-3,. |
| Docket sheet from Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 31 pages. |
| United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Global's Final Invalidity Contentions, Civil Action No. 4:17-cv-03299, dated Apr. 12, 2021, 59 pages. |
| Exhibit A-1 Identification of Asserted Claims and Limitations Therein, U.S. Pat. No. 9,803,256, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 19 pages, 4 pages. |
| Exhibit A-2 U.S. Pat. No. 9,803,256, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 19 pages, 30 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Altschuler 715, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO11425) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 19 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Altschuler 856, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO 11442) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 17 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Api Specification, American Petroleum Institute, Specification for Coiled Tubing, API Specification 5ST, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0224055) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 13 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Asano (Supplemental), served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to documents beginning with page GTOO 11542 and GTOO 11547) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 18 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Chitwood, High Strength Coiled Tubing Expands Service Capabilities, served by Global Tubing on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0023898 and ending with page GT0023913) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 28 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Crowther, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0012789) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 23 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 CT Manual (Supplemental), Coiled Tubing Manual, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0011855) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 15 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Cymax 100, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District of Texas, Houston Division, 22 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Cymax Brochure, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document labeled with pages TCT0009950-89) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 21 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Eguchi 681, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO12866 and ending with page GTOO12878) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 26 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Eguchi 2012, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO 12879) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 24 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Feng, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0283198) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 15 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Fujishiro, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025074 and ending with page GT0025083) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 21 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Kushida, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0012967) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 22 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 O'Hara, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025287) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 14 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Peters, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0013047) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 20 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Satou, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025646) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 17 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 SeaCAT 100, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to documents beginning with page TCT0374366, GT0210506, TCT0373809, TCT0372631, GT0011295, TCT0372486, TCT0375105, TCT03727329-TCT0374535) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 16 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 SeaCAT Specification, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0210506) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 12 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Takeshi, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025731) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 17 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Thompson, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document labeled with pages TCT0009930-49) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 21 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Turconi, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0011237) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 22 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Turconi 2001, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025769) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 19 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Valdez 2010, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO11261) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 16 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Williams, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0011295) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 13 pages. |
| Exhibit A-3 Zemick, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0011300) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 18 pages. |
| Exhibit B-1, Identification of Asserted Claims and Limitations Therein, U.S. Pat. No. 10,378,074, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 4 pages. |
| Exhibit B-2, U.S. Pat. No. 10,378,074, 28 pages with Exhibit B-3 Attachments totaling 233 pages, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Exhibit B-3 Altschuler 715, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO11425) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 9 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Altschuler 856, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO 11442) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 8 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Api Specification, American Petroleum Institute, Specification for Coiled Tubing, API Specification 5ST, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0224055) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Asano (Supplemental), served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to documents beginning with page GTOO 11542 and GTOO 11547) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Chitwood, High Strength Coiled Tubing Expands Service Capabilities, served by Global Tubing on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0023898 and ending with page GT0023913) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Crowther, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0012789) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 10 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 CT Manual (Supplemental), Coiled Tubing Manual, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0011855) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Cymax 100, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District of Texas, Houston Division, 8 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Cymax Brochure, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document labeled with pages TCT0009950-89) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Eguchi 681, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO 12866 and ending with page GTOO 12878) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Divisionl 1 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Eguchi 2012, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO12879) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 12 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Feng, served in Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0283198) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston DivisionlO pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Fujishiro, served in Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025074 and ending with page GT0025083) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 10 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Kushida, served in Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0012967) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 13 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 O'Hara, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025287) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 6 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Peters, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0013047) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 19 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Satou, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025646) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 9 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 SeaCAT 100, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to documents beginning with page TCT0374366, GT0210506, TCT0373809, TCT0372631, GT0011295, TCT0372486, TCT0375105, TCT0372730, TCT0374535) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 8 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 SeaCAT Specification, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0210506) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Takeshi, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025731) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 8 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Thompson, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document labeled with pages TCT0009930-49) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Turconi, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0011237) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 11 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Turconi 2001, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025769) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 11 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Valdez 2010, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO11261) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Williams, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0011295) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Exhibit B-3 Zemick, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0011300) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Exhibit C-1, Identification of Asserted Claims and Limitations Therein, U.S. Pat. No. 10,378,075, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 4 pages. |
| Exhibit C-2, U.S. Pat. No. 10,378,075, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 6 pages with Exhibit C-3 Attachments totaling 260 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Altschuler 715, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO 11425) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Altschuler 856, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO 11442) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 API Specification, American Petroleum Institute, Specification for Coiled Tubing, API Specification 5ST, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with No. GT0224055) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Asano (Supplemental), served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to documents beginning with page GTOO11542 and GTOO11547) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Chitwood, High Strength Coiled Tubing Expands Service Capabilities, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0023898 and ending with page GT0023913) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Crowther, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0012789) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 CT Manual (Supplemental), Coiled Tubing Manual, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0011855) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Cymax 100, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Cymax Brochure, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document labeled with pages TCT0009950-89) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Eguchi 681, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO 12866 and ending with page GTOO 12878) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Eguchi 2012, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO 12879) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Feng, served in Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0283198) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Fujishiro, served in Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025074 and ending with page GT0025083) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Kushida, served in Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0012967) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 O'Hara, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025287) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Peters, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0013047) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Satou, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025646) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 SeaCAT 100, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to documents beginning with page TCT0374366, GT0210506, TCT0373809, TCT0372631, GT0011295, TCT0372486, TCT0375105, TCT0372730, TCT0374535) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 SeaCAT Specification, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0210506) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Takeshi, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025731) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Thompson, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document labeled with pages TCT0009930-49) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Turconi, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0011237) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Turconi 2001, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0025769) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Valdez 2010, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GTOO11261) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Williams, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0011295) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Exhibit C-3 Zemick, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 (and referring to a document beginning with page GT0011300) in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 5,662,145, issued Sep. 2, 1997, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. Gtoo 11220-GT0011231 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 12 pages. |
| Timkin “Practical Data for Metallurgists”, published 1993, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011232-GT0011236 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al.. case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 7,862,667, issued Jan. 4, 2011, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. Gtoo 11237-GT0011252 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 16 pages. |
| Urayama et al., “Research and Development of Advanced Coiled-Tubing Construction and Performance”, published Jun. 1, 2001, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011253-GT0011260 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 8 pages. |
| United States Publication No. 2010/0136363 Al, Jun. 3, 2010, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. Gtoo 11261-GTOO 11279 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 19 pages. |
| Williams, et al., “Mensa Project: Hydraulic Umbilicals”, OTC 8629, Offshore Technology Conference, 1998, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011295-GT0011299 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| Zemick, Bill, “The Development and testing of CYMAX 100 Coiled Tubing”, from “Benefits of full body quench and tempered coiled tubing”, First Annual Conference on Coiled Tubing Operations & Slimhole Drilling Practices, Mar. 1-4, 1993, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011300-GT0011313 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 14 pages. |
| API Specification, “ISO 11960:2011 Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries - Steel Pipes for Use as Casing or Tubing for Wells”, published Jun. 2011, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011314-GT0011404 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 91 pages. |
| Afghoul et al., “Coiled Tubing: The Next Generation”, published in 2004, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011405-GTOO11424, in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 20 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 8,414,715, issued Apr. 9, 2013, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011425-GT0011441 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 17 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 8,636,856, issued Jan. 28, 2014, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011442-GT0011459 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 18 pages. |
| English translation of JP2010270394A to Asano et al., Dec. 2, 2010, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011542-GT0011546 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| JP 2010-270394 A, Dec. 2, 2010, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011547-GT0011555 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 9 pages. |
| ASTM Designation: A 606-75, “American Society for Testing and Materials” American National Standards Institute , publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011556-GT0011559, in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 4 pages. |
| ASTM Designation: A 607-75 (Reapproved 1981), Standard Specification for Steel Sheet and Strip, Hot-Rolled and Cold-Rolled, High-Strength, Low-Alloy Columbium and/or Vanadium, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011560-GT0011563 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 4 pages. |
| ASTM Designation: A 715-81, Standard Specification for Steel Sheet and Strip, Hot-Rolled and Cold-Rolled, High-Strength, Low-Alloy with Improved Formability, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011564-GT0011567, in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 4 pages. |
| Babu et al., “Effect of Austenitizing Temperature and Cooling Rate on the Structure and Properties of a Ultrahigh Strength Low Alloy Steel”, 2006, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011568-GT0011577, in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 10 pages. |
| Bhadeshia, “Martensite and Bainite in Steels: Transformation Mechanism and Mechanical Properties”, Jan. 1997, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011578-GT0011588, in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 11 pages. |
| Caballero et al., “The Microstructure of Continuously Cooled Tough Bainitic Steels”, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011589-GT0011598 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 10 pages. |
| Caballero et al., “Influence of bainite morphology on impact toughness of continuously cooled cementite free bainitic steels”, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011599-GT0011606 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 8 pages. |
| CLI International “Final Report: Serviceability of Coiled Tubing for Sour Oil and Gas Wells”, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GTOO11607-GT0011796 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 190 pages. |
| English translation of Chinese Patent No. 1873041A, Dec. 6, 2006, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. Gtoo 11821-GTOO 11827 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| English translation of Chinese Patent No. 101603156A, Dec. 16, 2009, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011842-GT0011854 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 13 pages. |
| CTES LP, “Coiled Tubing Manual”, Rev. 72005-A, 2005, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0011855-GT0012788 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 934 pages. |
| European Patent 2729590 Bl, Oct. 28, 2015, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0012789-GT0012802 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 14 pages. |
| International Publication No. WO 2012/051335 Al, Apr. 19, 2012, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0012803-GT0012832 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 30 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 4,863,091, Sep. 5, 1989, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0012833-GT0012842 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, IQpages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 5,191,911, Mar. 9, 1993, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0012843-GT0012851 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 9 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 9,234,254, issued Jan. 12, 2016, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0012852-GTOO12865 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 14 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 9,708,681, issued Jul. 18, 2017, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0012866-GT0012878 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 13 pages. |
| European Publication EP 2447386 Al, May 2, 2012, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0012879-GTOO12903 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 25 pages. |
| Mahallawi et al., “Influence of Heat Input and Post-Weld Heat Treatment on Boiler Steel P91 (9Cr-IMo-V-Nb) Weld Joints, I. Microstructure”, Mar. 2013, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0012904-GT0012913 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 10 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 2,586,041, issued Feb. 19, 1952, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0012914-GT0012915 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 2 pages. |
| Johnson et al., “Toughness of Tempered Upper and Lower Bainitic Microstructures in a 4150 Steel”, 1993, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0012916-GT0012924 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 9 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 6,267,828, Jul. 31, 2001, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0012967-GT0012977 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 11 pages. |
| Lawrynowicz et al., “Features of Bainite Transformation in Steels”, published Nov. 2002, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0012978-GT0013005 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 28 pages. |
| Peet et al., “Fatigue of Extremely Fine Bainite”, published in 2011 served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0013042-GT0013046 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| United States Publication No. 2011/0259482 Al, Oct. 27, 2011, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0013047-GT0013053 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 4,461,657, issued Jul. 24, 1984, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0013054-GT0013065 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 12 pages. |
| SAE International, Surface Vehicle Standard J404, “Chemical Compositions of SAE Alloy Steels”, Feb. 1991, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0013066-GT0013072 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Charbonnier et al., “Sulfide Stress Cracking of High Strength Modified Cr-Mo Steels”, published May 1985, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0013073-GT0013082 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 10 pages. |
| Craig, Bruce D., “Oilfield Metallurgy and Corrosion”, Third Edition, published in 1993, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0013083-GT0013375 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 293 pages. |
| Wang et al., “Study of High Strength Pipeline Steels with Different Microstructures”, 2009, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0013376-GT0013382 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Rak et al., “Weldability and Toughness Assessment of Ti-Macroalloyed Offshore Steel”, published Jan. 1997, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0013383-GT0013390 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 8 pages. |
| Goodall, Graeme Robertson, “Welding High Strength Modem Line Pipe Steel”, 2011, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0013391-GT0013603 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 213 pages. |
| Cayard et al., “Serviceability of Coiled Tubing for Sour Oil and Gas Wells” 1996, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0013604-GT0013622 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 19 pages. |
| Maurer Engineering Inc., “Coiled-Tubing Technology (1995-1998)”, Apr. 1998, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0013623-GT0014082 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 460 pages. |
| Cayard et al., “SPE 38410: Serviceability of Coiled Tubing for Sour Oil and Gas Wells”, 1997, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0014083-GT0014097 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 15 pages. |
| NACE International, NACE Standard TM0177-96 Item No. 21212, “Standard Test Method -Laboratory Testing of Metals for Resistance to Specific Forms of Environmental Cracking in H2S Environments”, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0014098-GT0014132 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 35 pages. |
| NACE International, NACE Standard MR0175-93 Item No. 53024, “Standard Material Requirements -Sulfide Stress Cracking Resistant Metallic Materials for Oilfield Equipment”, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT001413 3-GT0014160 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 28 pages. |
| Bramfitt et al., “Metallography and Microstructures of Carbon and Low-Alloy Steels”, ASM Handbook, vol. 9: Metallography and Microstructures, 2004, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0014161-GT0014179 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 19 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 5,374,322, issued Dec. 20, 1994, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0022740-GT0022752 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 13 pages. |
| United States Publication No. 2012/0199255 Al, Aug. 9, 2012, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0022819-GT0022846 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 28 pages. |
| United States Publication No. 2005/0217768 Al, Oct. 6, 2005, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0022847-GT0022858 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 12 pages. |
| Ruglic et al., “Normalizing of Steel”, ASM Handbook, vol. 4, Heat Treating, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0022892-GT0022902 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 11 pages. |
| Ericsson, Torsten, “Principles of Heat Treating of Steels”, ASM Handbook, vol. 4, Heat Treating, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0022903-GT0022923 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 21 pages. |
| Kirkaldy, U.S., “Quantitative Prediction of Transformation Hardening in Steels”, ASM Handbook, vol. 4, Heat Treating, published in 1991, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0022924-GT0022940 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 17 pages. |
| Bates, et al., “Quenching of Steel”, ASM Handbook, vol. 4, Heat Treating, published in 1993, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0022941-GT0022998 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 58 pages. |
| Canonico, Domenic A., “Stress-Relief Heat Treating of Steel”, ASM Handbook, vol. 4, Heat Treating, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0022999-GT0023004 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 6 pages. |
| Welding Handbook, 9th Edition, vol. 4, Materials and Applications, Part 1, published 2011, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0023025-GT0023884 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 860 pages. |
| Chitwood et al., “OTC 7032 High-Strength Coiled Tubing Expands Service Capabilities”, 1992, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0023898-GT0023913 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 16 pages. |
| Coiled Tubing Times, ISSN 1817-3330, Dec. 2012, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0024848-GT0024973 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 126 pages. |
| International Coiled Tubing Association, “An Introduction to Coiled Tubing”, 2004, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0024985-GT0025016 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 32 pages. |
| English translation of Japanese Publication No. 2000-282144, Oct. 10, 2000, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025063-GT0025073 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 11 pages. |
| English translation of Japanese Publication No. S58-19439, Feb. 2, 1983, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025074-GT0025083 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 10 pages. |
| English translation of Chinese Publication No. 101602079 B, May 4, 2011, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025109-GT0025131 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 23 pages. |
| Makela, Weldon, “Heat Treating Basics”, Jul. 26, 2012, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025132-GT0025167 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 36 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 6,136,109, issued Oct. 24, 2000, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025168-GT0025175 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 8 pages. |
| United States Publication No. 2005/0034795 Al, Feb. 17, 2005, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025176-GT0025187 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 12 pages. |
| NACE International, NACE Standard MRO175-2002 Item No. 21304, “Standard Material Requirements - Sulfide Stress Cracking Resistant Metallic Materials for Oilfield Equipment”, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025188-GT0025227 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 40 pages. |
| NACE International, NACE Standard MRO 175-2003 Item No. 21302, “Standard Material Requirements - Metals for Sulfide Stress Cracking and Stress Corrosion Cracking Resistance in Sour Oilfield Environments”, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025228-GT0025271 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 44 pages. |
| Ogden, Becky L., “Sulfide Stress Cracking - Practical Application to the Oil and Gas Industry”, 2005, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025272-GT0025286 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 15 pages. |
| Canadian Publication No. CA 2414822 Al, Jun. 18, 2004, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025287-GT0025322 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 36 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 7,048,811, issued May 23, 2006, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025323-GT0025329 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Grossmann et al., “Principles of Heat Treatment - Fifth Edition”, American Society for Metals, Apr. 1971, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025330-GT0025645 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 316 pages. |
| United States Publication No. 2008/0226491 Al, Sep. 19, 2008, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025646-GT0025657 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 12 pages. |
| United States Publication No. 2008/0302452 Al, Dec. 11, 2008, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025658-GT0025661 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 4 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 4,533,405, issued Aug. 6, 1985, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025662-GT0025698 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 37 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 6,217,676, issued Apr. 17, 2001, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025699-GT0025706 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division,8 pages. |
| English translation of Japanese Publication No. H06-116645, Apr. 26, 1994, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025707-GT0025730 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 24 pages. |
| English translation of Japanese Patent Publication No. H09-201688, Aug. 5, 1997, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025731-GT0025748 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 18 pages. |
| Turconi, et al., “Improvement of Resistance to SCC Initiation and Propagation of High Strength OCTG Through Micro structure and Precipitation Control”, Paper No. 01077, Corrosion 2001, 2001, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0025769-GT0025783 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 15 pages. |
| ASM International, Practical Heat Treating, Second Edition (#05144G), “Chapter 2 - Fundamentals of the Heat Treating of Steel”, 2006, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0035357-GT0035374 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 18 pages. |
| Davis, J.R., Metals Handbook - Desk Edition, Second Edition, pp. 32, 61, 1471, 1517, and 103, published in 1998, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0051499-GT0051506 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 8 pages. |
| Arai, et al., ASM Handbook, vol. 4 - Heat Treating, 1994, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0130869-GT0131868 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 1000 pages. |
| “SeaCAT LP - Specification for SeaCAT 100 Umbilical Tubing Continuous Anode Technology”, <http://seacatcorp.com/SeaCat 100 Tubing spec Rev 5 Jul. 1, 2003.htm>, dated Nov. 14, 2004, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0210506-GT0210510 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 5 pages. |
| “Specification for Coiled Tubing - U.S. Customary and SI Units”, API Specification 5ST, First Edition, Apr. 2010, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0224055-GT0224129 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 75 pages. |
| English translation of Chinese Publication No. CN 101898295 A, Dec. 1, 2010, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0283198-GT0283211 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 14 pages. |
| ASTM International, Designation A 255-02, “Standard Test Methods for Determining Hardenability of Steel”, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0283245-GT0283268 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 24 pages. |
| Newman, Kenneth R, SPE163884, “Development of a New CT Life Tracking Process”, SPE International, 2013, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0283277-GT0283288 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 12 pages. |
| Coloschi et al., SPE163930, “A Metallurgical Look at Coiled Tubing”, SPE International, 2013, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0283289-GT0283297 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 9 pages. |
| Seal et al., SPE 173660, “A Field Case History of Sulfate Reducing Bacteria Attack on Coiled Tubing Bias Welds - Root Causes and Remediation”, SPE International, 2015, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0283298-GT0283313 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 16 pages. |
| Padron et al., SPE-179045-MS, “CT100+ Bias Weld Fatigue Life Estimations - Are Adjustments Required”, SPE International, 2016, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0283314-GT0283332 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 19 pages. |
| Trzaska et al., “The calculation of CCT diagrams for engineering steels”, Archives of Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 39, Issue 1, Sep. 2009, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0283333-GT0283340 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 8 pages. |
| Saunders et al., “Using JMatPro to Model Materials Properties and Behavior”, Dec. 2003, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0283341-GT0283346 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 6 pages. |
| Zhao, J.-C., Methods for Phase Diagram Determination, published in 2011, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0283347-GT0283863 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 517 pages. |
| Campbell, F.C., “Alloy Steels”, Chapter 20, Elements of Metallurgy and Engineering Alloys, first printing Jun. 2008, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0283864-GT0283867 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 4 pages. |
| API Specification 5L, Specification for Line Pipe, 45th Edition, Jul. 2013, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0283868-GT0284059 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 192 pages. |
| ASTM International, Designation: El 12-12, “Standard Test Methods for Determining Average Grain Size”, publication date unknown, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284060-GT0284086 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 27 pages. |
| Gauthier, Michelle M., “Glossary of Terms”, Engineered Materials Handbook Desk Edition, 1995, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284087-GT0284156 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 70 pages. |
| Burner, Jr., Harold, “Hardenability of Carbon and Low-Alloy Steels”, ASM Handbook, vol. 1: Properties and Selection: Irons, Steels, and High-Performance Alloys, 1990, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284157-GT0284177 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 21 pages. |
| “High-Strength Structural and High-Strength Low-Alloy Steels”, ASM Handbook, vol. 1: Properties and Selection: Irons, Steels, and High-Performance Alloys, 1990, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284178-GT0284212 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 35 pages. |
| Kraus, George, “Microstructures, Processing, and Properties of Steels”, ASM Handbook, vol. 1: Properties and Selection: Irons, Steels, and High-Performance Alloys, 1990, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284213-GT0284226 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 14 pages. |
| Liu et al., “Weldability of Steels”, ASM Handbook vol. 1: Properties and Selection: Irons, Steels, and High-Performance Alloys, 1990, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284227-GT0284237 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 11 pages. |
| “Fracture Mechanics Properties of Carbon and Alloy Steels”, ASM Handbook, vol. 19: Fatigue and Fracture, 1996, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as No. GT0284238-GT0284278 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 41 pages. |
| Landes, JohnD., “Fracture Toughness Testing”, ASM Handbook, vol. 19: Fatigue and Fracture, 1996, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284279-GT0284295 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 17 pages. |
| Antolovich, Stephen D., “Alloy Design for Fatigue and Fracture”, ASM Handbook, vol. 19: Fatigue and Fracture, 1996, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284296-GT0284310 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 15 pages. |
| “Software for Computational Materials Modeling and Simulation”, ASM Handbook, vol. 22B, Metals Process Simulation, 2010, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284311-GT0284318 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 8 pages. |
| “Introduction to Steel Heat Treatment”, ASM Handbook, vol. 4A, Steel Heat Treating Fundamentals and Processes, 2013, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284319-GT0284341 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 23 pages. |
| Chen et al., “Influence of Welding on Steel Weldment Properties”, ASM Handbook, vol. 6: Welding, Brazing, and Soldering, 1993, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284342-GT0284354 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 13 pages. |
| Somers, Bruce R., “Introduction to the Selection of Carbon and Low-Alloy Steels”, ASM Handbook, vol. 6: Welding, Brazing, and Soldering, 1993, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284355-GT0284357 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 3 pages. |
| Dupont, John N., “Fundamentals of Weld Solidification”, ASM Handbook, vol. 6A, Welding Fundamentals and Processes, 2011, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284358-GT0284376 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 19 pages. |
| Maalekian, Mehran, “Solid-State Transformations in Weldments”, ASM Handbook, vol. 6A, Welding Fundamentals and Processes, 2011, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284377-GT0284400 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 24 pages. |
| “Fracture Toughness and Fracture Mechanics”, ASM Handbook, vol. 8: Mechanical Testing and Evaluation, 2000, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284401-GT0284413 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 13 pages. |
| “Impact Toughness Testing”, ASM Handbook, vol. 8: Mechanical Testing and Evaluation, 2000, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284414-GT0284429 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 16 pages. |
| Revankar, Gopal, “Introduction to Hardness Testing”, Mechanical Testing and Evaluation, vol. 8, ASM Handbook, revised online 2016, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284430-GT0284442 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 13 pages. |
| “Martensitic Structures”, ASM Handbook, vol. 9: Metallography and Microstructures, 2004, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284443-GT0284456 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 14 pages. |
| Aliya, Debbie, “Physical Metallurgy Concepts in Interpretation of Microstructures”, ASM Handbook, vol. 9: Metallography and Microstructures, 2004, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284457-GT0284483 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 27 pages. |
| Adams et al., SPE 29456, “An Evaluation of Large Diameter Coiled Tubing for Subsurface Production Tubulars”, SPE International, 1995, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284484-GT0284489 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 6 pages. |
| U.S. Pat. No. 8,323,560, issued Dec. 4, 2012, served by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 12, 2021 as Nos. GT0284490-GT0284501 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 12 pages. |
| Transcript of Videotaped Deposition of Philip Lewis, Dec. 15, 2020, as presented in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 12 pages. |
| Brown, et al., “DEA-97 Coiled Tubing Weld Cycle Life, Joint Industry Project”, Part I: Final Project Report, Oct. 26, 1995, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0282964-TCT0283071 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 108 pages. |
| Southwestern Pipe, Inc, “The Development and Testing of CYMAX 100 Coiled Tubing”, Jan. 1992, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0009962-TCT0009976 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 15 pages. |
| Southwestern Pipe, Inc, “Orbital Tig Welding, CYMAX Coiled Tubing”, Nov. 1992, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0009977-TCT0009989 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 13 pages. |
| Southwestern Pipe, Inc, “Southwestern Pipe, Inc., CYMAX Division, Coiled Tubing Specifications, Technical Data”, Jan. 1, 1993, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0009950-TCT0009961 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 12 pages. |
| CYMAX Southwestern Pipe, Inc. Presentation, publication date unknown, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0013999-TCT0014057 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 57 pages. |
| Thompson, J.M., “Full Body Quenched and Tempered Coiled Tubing Theory vs. Field Experience”, CYMAX Division, published Mar. 1, 1994, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0009930-TCT0009989 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 60 pages. |
| SeaCAT Corporation Specification for SeaCAT Umbilical Tubing Continuous Anode Technology, published in 2000, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0373809-TCT0373819 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 11 pages. |
| SeaCAT 2001 Specification Umbilical Tubing Continuous Anode Technology, published Oct. 1, 2001 - Revision 11, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0372656-TCT0372661 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 6 pages. |
| SeaCAT Brochure—Coiled Tubing for Subsea Umbilical and Flowline Applications, publication date unknown, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0375105-TCT0375246 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 142 pages. |
| SeaCAT Handbook—Coiled Tubing for Subsea Umbilical and Flowline Application, published in Spring 2005, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0372486-TCT0372630 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 145 pages. |
| SeaCAT Shell Princess Project—published in Aug. 2002, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0374261-TCT0374534 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 274 pages. |
| SeaCAT Process Control, published in 1999, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0374535-TCT0374783 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 249 pages. |
| SeaCAT Qualification, published Oct. 4, 2001, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0372729-TCT0372734 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 6 pages. |
| Auguston, Rogerio “The Influence of Chemical Composition and Microstructure of API Linepipe Steels on Hydrogen Induced Cracking and Sulfide Stress Corrosion Cracking”, Materials Science and Engineering, published in 2003, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0152051-TCT0152057 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 7 pages. |
| Faszold, J., SPE0153945 “Full-Scale Fatigue Testing with 130k Yield Tubing”, SPE International, published in 2012, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0626230-TCT0626235 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 6 pages. |
| Coulomb Status Summary Report published on Oct. 10, 2001, produced by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC as Nos. TCT0372631-TCT0372667 in Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al.case No. 4:17-cv-03299 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 37 pages. |
| Complaint filed by Global Tubing LLC (with Attachment: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) on Oct. 30, 2017, as pleading No. 1 in case 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| First Amended Complaint with Jury Demand against Tenaris Coiled Tubes LLC filed by Global Tubing LLC on Feb. 12, 2018 as pleading No. 19 in case No. 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Answer to 19 Amended Complaint/Counterclaim/Crossclaim etc. by Tenaris Coiled Tubes LLC, filed on Aug. 13, 2018 as pleading No. 36 in case No. 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Supplement to 19 Amended Complaint/Counterclaim/Crossclaim etc., by Global Tubing LLC (with Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5) filed on Jan. 29, 2019 as pleading No. 47 in case No. 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Amended Answer to 1 Complaint with Jury Demand, Counterclaim against Global Tubing LLC by Tenaris Coiled Tubes LLC (with Attachment: #1 Exhibit A), filed on Mar. 25, 2019 as pleading No. 57 in case No. 4:17-cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Supplement to 57 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim by Tenaris Coiled Tubes LLC filed on Jul. 9, 2019 as pleading No. 71 in case No. 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Second Amended Answer to 57 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim with Jury Demand, Counterclaim against Global Tubing LLC by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC, filed by Global Tubing, LLC (with Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C) on Aug. 13, 2019 as pleading No. 74 in case No. 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Third Amended Answer to 74 Amended Answer, Counterclaim, with Jury Demand, Counterclaim against Global Tubing LLC by Tenaris S.A., Tenaris Coiled Tubes LLC (with Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C) filed on Sep. 30, 2019 as pleading No. 76 in case No. 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Redaction to 80 Sealed Document by Global Tubing LLC [Redacted], filed by Global Tubing, LLC on Dec. 13, 2019 as pleading No. 97 in case No. 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Redaction to 81 Sealed Document by Global Tubing LLC, filed by Global Tubing, LLC on Jan. 23, 2020 as pleading No. 98 in case No. 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Response to 96 Sealed Document Tenaris' Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Counterclaims to Second Amended Complaint, filed by Global Tubing LLC on Jan. 31, 2020 as pleading No. 100 in case No. 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Response to Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC's Amended Answer and Tenaris SA's Original Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Counterclaims to Second Amended Complaint re: 119 Sealed Document [Redacted], filed by Global Tubing, LLC on Apr. 29, 2020 as pleading No. 124 in case No. 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Tenaris' Supplemental Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Counterclaims to Global Tubing's Second Amended Complaint [Redacted], filed by Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC and Tenaris S.A. (with #1 Appendix) on May 14, 2020 as pleading No. 129 in case No. 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Memorandum and Order filed on Jun. 22, 2020 as pleading No. 140 in case No. 4:17- cv-03299, Global Tubing, LLC vs. Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC et al., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20190360063 A1 | Nov 2019 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 61783701 | Mar 2013 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 15665054 | Jul 2017 | US |
| Child | 16538326 | US | |
| Parent | 14190886 | Feb 2014 | US |
| Child | 15665054 | US |
